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.

Its gotten so bad that now its subliminal mostly... For a good mental exercise, play dice. You have 5 dice, rolling 1 gives you 100 points, 5 50, 3 of a kind # * 100, cept 1s are 1000.keep the dice you've gotten points on(you only hace to keep one die), and you can roll the rest if you want to, but if you dont score any points, you lose all your points that turn. Try to get to 5000. Its really simple to get started, and the farther you think, the more complex it gets.

The dice dont care about theoretical maths results, terminators may save 5 out of 6 saves in theory, you can still end up rolling 4 1's and a 3.

Theory is great but there comes a point when you have to leave it behind for the practical, and the two do not always agree.

"luck" can always intervene and make the result anything but what you expect.

My issue is that when you have a unit like terminators, that low chance of rolling bad neuters the unit-and rolling all 6s means nothing special. Same situation, but with orks. With the same number of dice if you roll bad you don't care nearly as much as they don't save well in the first place, but if you roll a bunch of 6s it's amazing. Thus terminators are subject to more "bad luck" and orks are subject to more "good luck."

This absolutely has bearing when discussing bad luck on terminators, the favorite bad luck kings, as probability plays such a large role in that unit and for the cost getting an early run of bad probability invalidates the entire unit. Yes we all probably know it can and will happen, but the entire point of taking the unit is because it is supposed to be a low probability.

The way I've tried to just disregard the math (Math, Maths, both are the informal form; we just streamline our laziness here in NA) of this game/the way I have tried to bridge the gap for people who don't care for statistics is, strength in stacking/numbers and re-rolls. Divination and Feel No Pain are great things for that so I got my nephew a BA army for his birthday so he could have some of both which helped him enjoy the game despite the fact that he has no concept of even basic statistic theory and while I try to explain to him the concept he only vaguely grasps it, but he understands re-rolls just fine.

I've spent hours power stacking squads & rolling them against other units in ideal settings and non-ideal settings to get the maximum effect out of them and time and time again I still revert back to Toxin sac Warriors with a Prime, lash whips, bone-swords and scything talons as the standard in CC. This was one of the first units I ever fielded and it has colored my perspective on the game ever since. Multi-wound models with a bunch of re-rolls attached and feel no pain (thank you 6th edition!) overcome most of the "luck" aspect of the game as even though on every d6 1-6 have an equal chance of showing up with every roll, the odds are severely lessened of a bad luck roll when you get to re-roll all of them that don't make it the first time (even of the odds of the second sucess are only 33%, it is much better than nothing).

The greatest thing about 6th in my opinion is with allies you can more easily teach people to play and play well by teaming up with them till they get a rhythm. One thing I use to try to help explain the theory to my nephew is before a set of rolls I tell him what the odds are of successes vs. failures and then roll and divide the dice up into their respective 33% or 16.66% or 50% what-have-you. They don't always group together exactly as statistics suggest, but more often than not they do or are one die off, which has helped him understand what to expect when throwing units at each-other. A couple people in my gaming group started doing the same after I subconsciously started mumbling the statistics aloud after my rolls which has helped solidify and refine some of our unit choices over time. I also try to explain to my Nephew that math isn't everything in this game, but it is good to understand what you can reasonably expect out of a unit's performance before deciding what to use it for. I'll admit I often quote Sun Tzu at him, "It is said that if you know your enemies and know yourself, you need not fear the outcome of a hundred battles; if you do not know your enemies but do know yourself, you will win as often as you lose; if you do not know your enemies nor yourself, you will be imperiled in every single battle."

As far as allocating wounds, my friends and I always just keep a D6, D8, D10 & D12 on hand to balance that out as I feel there is no reason to bring a 2D6 roll into wound allocation for the reasons mentioned above.

DevianID wrote:
My issue is that when you have a unit like terminators, that low chance of rolling bad neuters the unit-and rolling all 6s means nothing special. Same situation, but with orks. With the same number of dice if you roll bad you don't care nearly as much as they don't save well in the first place, but if you roll a bunch of 6s it's amazing. Thus terminators are subject to more "bad luck" and orks are subject to more "good luck."

This absolutely has bearing when discussing bad luck on terminators, the favorite bad luck kings, as probability plays such a large role in that unit and for the cost getting an early run of bad probability invalidates the entire unit. Yes we all probably know it can and will happen, but the entire point of taking the unit is because it is supposed to be a low probability.

Very astute observation, Orks will consistently approach avarage due to the volume of dice rolled but terminators as you called it subject to the results of very few die making each roll more meaningful and far more harsh when the bad results comes early.

hobojebus wrote:
The dice dont care about theoretical maths results, terminators may save 5 out of 6 saves in theory, you can still end up rolling 4 1's and a 3.

Theory is great but there comes a point when you have to leave it behind for the practical, and the two do not always agree.

"luck" can always intervene and make the result anything but what you expect.

In my most recent game, on the first turn, a Big Mek got a high strength shot off with his Shokk Attack Gun at a unit of Battle Sisters. Didn't scatter, and hit all 10 of them. Every hit wounded. Only half of the unit was in 4+ cover, so the wounds alternated between models in cover and models not in cover. And yet, I only lost 3 Sisters. It didn't matter, though, because they failed their Morale test and fell back off the board.

 Pouncey wrote:

hobojebus wrote:
The dice dont care about theoretical maths results, terminators may save 5 out of 6 saves in theory, you can still end up rolling 4 1's and a 3.

Theory is great but there comes a point when you have to leave it behind for the practical, and the two do not always agree.

"luck" can always intervene and make the result anything but what you expect.

In my most recent game, on the first turn, a Big Mek got a high strength shot off with his Shokk Attack Gun at a unit of Battle Sisters. Didn't scatter, and hit all 10 of them. Every hit wounded. Only half of the unit was in 4+ cover, so the wounds alternated between models in cover and models not in cover. And yet, I only lost 3 Sisters. It didn't matter, though, because they failed their Morale test and fell back off the board.

My most recent game against my DE playing friend, his Wyches deep struck near a Carnifex and shot it with Splinter Pistols.They hit with 9 out of 10 3+ rolls. They wounded with 8 out of 9 4+ rolls. I failed 6 out of 8 3+ saves.

 -Loki- wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:

hobojebus wrote:
The dice dont care about theoretical maths results, terminators may save 5 out of 6 saves in theory, you can still end up rolling 4 1's and a 3.

Theory is great but there comes a point when you have to leave it behind for the practical, and the two do not always agree.

"luck" can always intervene and make the result anything but what you expect.

In my most recent game, on the first turn, a Big Mek got a high strength shot off with his Shokk Attack Gun at a unit of Battle Sisters. Didn't scatter, and hit all 10 of them. Every hit wounded. Only half of the unit was in 4+ cover, so the wounds alternated between models in cover and models not in cover. And yet, I only lost 3 Sisters. It didn't matter, though, because they failed their Morale test and fell back off the board.

My most recent game against my DE playing friend, his Wyches deep struck near a Carnifex and shot it with Splinter Pistols.They hit with 9 out of 10 3+ rolls. They wounded with 8 out of 9 4+ rolls. I failed 6 out of 8 3+ saves.

Nice.

 Pouncey wrote:

 -Loki- wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:

hobojebus wrote:
The dice dont care about theoretical maths results, terminators may save 5 out of 6 saves in theory, you can still end up rolling 4 1's and a 3.

Theory is great but there comes a point when you have to leave it behind for the practical, and the two do not always agree.

"luck" can always intervene and make the result anything but what you expect.

In my most recent game, on the first turn, a Big Mek got a high strength shot off with his Shokk Attack Gun at a unit of Battle Sisters. Didn't scatter, and hit all 10 of them. Every hit wounded. Only half of the unit was in 4+ cover, so the wounds alternated between models in cover and models not in cover. And yet, I only lost 3 Sisters. It didn't matter, though, because they failed their Morale test and fell back off the board.

My most recent game against my DE playing friend, his Wyches deep struck near a Carnifex and shot it with Splinter Pistols.They hit with 9 out of 10 3+ rolls. They wounded with 8 out of 9 4+ rolls. I failed 6 out of 8 3+ saves.

Nice.

In a recent tournament game my opponent had a squad of Grey Hunters near my Skyshield pad in a convenient formation for the Flamers that Deep Struck on my turn. My templates were able to hit 6 Marines each. So I rolled 18 dice and got 2 wounds.

In an earlier game, I had one flamer left from a squad of 4 which I moved to hit a squad of dismounted Sisters of Battle. I rolled 6 dice and all of them came up 1s and 2s.

DevianID wrote:
My issue is that when you have a unit like terminators, that low chance of rolling bad neuters the unit-and rolling all 6s means nothing special. Same situation, but with orks. With the same number of dice if you roll bad you don't care nearly as much as they don't save well in the first place, but if you roll a bunch of 6s it's amazing. Thus terminators are subject to more "bad luck" and orks are subject to more "good luck."

This absolutely has bearing when discussing bad luck on terminators, the favorite bad luck kings, as probability plays such a large role in that unit and for the cost getting an early run of bad probability invalidates the entire unit. Yes we all probably know it can and will happen, but the entire point of taking the unit is because it is supposed to be a low probability.

You're missing it entirely.

Orks get more good luck because they're green, and green is best. If they get bad luck, it's ok because there are always more boyz to fight again and get good luck. Statistics mean nothing to da boyz.

Darrett wrote:

DevianID wrote:
My issue is that when you have a unit like terminators, that low chance of rolling bad neuters the unit-and rolling all 6s means nothing special. Same situation, but with orks. With the same number of dice if you roll bad you don't care nearly as much as they don't save well in the first place, but if you roll a bunch of 6s it's amazing. Thus terminators are subject to more "bad luck" and orks are subject to more "good luck."

This absolutely has bearing when discussing bad luck on terminators, the favorite bad luck kings, as probability plays such a large role in that unit and for the cost getting an early run of bad probability invalidates the entire unit. Yes we all probably know it can and will happen, but the entire point of taking the unit is because it is supposed to be a low probability.

You're missing it entirely.

Orks get more good luck because they're green, and green is best. If they get bad luck, it's ok because there are always more boyz to fight again and get good luck. Statistics mean nothing to da boyz.

That makes no sense.

Green might be best, but blue is the color of luck, not green.

 Pouncey wrote:


That makes no sense.

Green might be best, but blue is the color of luck, not green.

I've never heard blue being lucky. Green, absolutely. Red, yes. Blue generally not.

Even so, if Orks believe they're lucky because they're green, then they are.

Well red is lucky in china.

The statistics help with figuring out target priortiy.
My favorite evil tactic I took on is a Dark Eldar with a ShadowField with an Eldar ability that allows save re-rolls (contested rule).

Normally 1 in 6 chance.
You need to roll one dice after another to hurt him:
6X6 = 36. A one in 36 chance just to get past the armor save.

Made a few Excel sheets to figure out how many figures "should" die based on the rolls needed... was a fun exercise.

Darrett wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:


That makes no sense.

Green might be best, but blue is the color of luck, not green.

I've never heard blue being lucky. Green, absolutely. Red, yes. Blue generally not.

Even so, if Orks believe they're lucky because they're green, then they are.

I thought I read that bit in the Ork Codex... Maybe I'm wrong.

Edit: I went and looked it up, turns out it's just the Death Skullz Clan, and it's just the Boyz who consider it lucky. It's in the army display section where they introduce the major clans.

hobojebus wrote:
The dice dont care about theoretical maths results, terminators may save 5 out of 6 saves in theory, you can still end up rolling 4 1's and a 3.

Theory is great but there comes a point when you have to leave it behind for the practical, and the two do not always agree.

"luck" can always intervene and make the result anything but what you expect.

There is no practical or theoretical. Only statistical.

Statistics shows what the chance is that something will happen. It does not show that a terminator will fail 1 in every 6 saves. It shows that a terminator has a 16% chance to fail any one save. Each additional save taken increases the odds of a save being failed.

What it really shows is the Mean result. If you roll 6 2+ saves 100 time each and recored the results you will have a bell shaped curve. Half the results will have more than 1 save failed, half will have less than 1 save failed.

I can figure out the exact probability that you would roll 6 saves and pass only one of them. And because the chance for that happening is low I will not base a strategy around it.


Its all about risk management. Is the risk of taking these saves(by putting myself in harms way) worth the payoff(I now have a unit of terminators in assault range of this squishy shooty unit)

Yes, rough understanding of how six-sided random number generators work is a fairly integral part of this hobby. It is no more amazing or unfair when some people in the hobby just can't paint decent looking eyes if their life depended on it (I certainly can't). At the same time it's nothing much to get upset over when I realise this. Only real difference is that lack of knowledge is harder for the person missing it to be self-analytical about.
Maybe it's a bit closer to how some people will have problems telling Blood Angels and Dark Angels apart. Even if some people will inevitably never learn how statistics work they can arrive to a point where they can trust other people's experience, just how the colour blind among us will eventually learn to accept that the other fellows' soldiers are the green of the Dark Angels and not red - even if they adamantly were red a week ago.

 Heartless wrote:
Ahhhhhh Maths, my greatest enemy to date...

I'm pretty sure that Maths is actually the Joker from Batman in disguise trying to troll me...

I'm fairly certain it's Two Face. Except he's using a dice.

People who write posts but suck at using paragraphs.

Sorry couldn't read the big wall of text. Can you please use paragraphs.

 Pouncey wrote:

 Fafnir wrote:
It's always 50/50. It either happens or it doesn't.

. . .

On 2d6, what are the odds of rolling a 2, versus not rolling a 2?

what are the odds of winning the lottery?

50/50 it either happens or it doesnt

Darrett wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:


That makes no sense.

Green might be best, but blue is the color of luck, not green.

I've never heard blue being lucky. Green, absolutely. Red, yes. Blue generally not.

Even so, if Orks believe they're lucky because they're green, then they are.

3ed Ork Dex, Deathskulls Blue is the lucky ork color.