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.

Chance of rolling a 5,6, 8 or 9 is:
4 ways to roll a 5.
5 ways to roll a 6.
5 ways to roll an 8.
4 ways to roll a 9.

Out of 36 possible combinations, 18 of them will have some sort of smackerie. That's HALF the time.
All my units testing half the time isn't nearly as bad as a much smaller fraction of your units half the time.

-Matt

 Taz0103 wrote:
"It actually makes DoC a lot better?" Excuse me while I wipe the tears of laughter from my eyes. Do you even play DoC, I mean seriously? I have been playing them since the new book came out...

So, a whole month then. I bow to your superior skills.

DukeRustfield wrote:
It actually makes DoC a lot better. Because every time you roll bad on the winds, every single unit the enemy has a chance of getting attacked while only ones with opposition models of yours would get attacked.

Like, "gee, sucks I only have 5 power dice, good thing Tzeentch has taken a person interest in my lack of magic and has decided to drop a flaming template on 1/6th of the units the enemy posses."

Unfortunately, if you roll really badly for WoM, then the RoC table just smacks the Daemons player in the face.

I've played about a dozen games in my local area where we have used the interpretation that you roll for all enemy units, and I'm averaging less than one wound caused by the RoC table per game. Most games, the 5, 6, 8, and 9 rolls don't end up doing anything. The rolls that tend to have the greatest overall impact on the game are 4 and 10. The +1 or -1 to DoC ward saves is much more significant that trying to roll a 6 for each unit and then rolling to see if anything happens to that unit.

Saldiven wrote:

DukeRustfield wrote:
It actually makes DoC a lot better. Because every time you roll bad on the winds, every single unit the enemy has a chance of getting attacked while only ones with opposition models of yours would get attacked.

Like, "gee, sucks I only have 5 power dice, good thing Tzeentch has taken a person interest in my lack of magic and has decided to drop a flaming template on 1/6th of the units the enemy posses."

Unfortunately, if you roll really badly for WoM, then the RoC table just smacks the Daemons player in the face.

I've played about a dozen games in my local area where we have used the interpretation that you roll for all enemy units, and I'm averaging less than one wound caused by the RoC table per game. Most games, the 5, 6, 8, and 9 rolls don't end up doing anything. The rolls that tend to have the greatest overall impact on the game are 4 and 10. The +1 or -1 to DoC ward saves is much more significant that trying to roll a 6 for each unit and then rolling to see if anything happens to that unit.

Ask the empire engineer about that. Characters on their own really don't like the chance to get tagged.
Any army that uses many units is really going to feel the effect of playing that way.
Try a game against skaven or lizardmen, where you could see 12-20 units.

Our local group has seen lots of these types of games, aka 15+ units. It has had a minimal impact, and I do mean minimal.

I find it hard to believe it is meant to punish the Daemon player more often then not. It is one of those situations where hopefully they will FAQ it and put it to rest quickly either way.

HawaiiMatt wrote:

Saldiven wrote:

DukeRustfield wrote:
It actually makes DoC a lot better. Because every time you roll bad on the winds, every single unit the enemy has a chance of getting attacked while only ones with opposition models of yours would get attacked.

Like, "gee, sucks I only have 5 power dice, good thing Tzeentch has taken a person interest in my lack of magic and has decided to drop a flaming template on 1/6th of the units the enemy posses."

Unfortunately, if you roll really badly for WoM, then the RoC table just smacks the Daemons player in the face.

I've played about a dozen games in my local area where we have used the interpretation that you roll for all enemy units, and I'm averaging less than one wound caused by the RoC table per game. Most games, the 5, 6, 8, and 9 rolls don't end up doing anything. The rolls that tend to have the greatest overall impact on the game are 4 and 10. The +1 or -1 to DoC ward saves is much more significant that trying to roll a 6 for each unit and then rolling to see if anything happens to that unit.

Ask the empire engineer about that. Characters on their own really don't like the chance to get tagged.
Any army that uses many units is really going to feel the effect of playing that way.
Try a game against skaven or lizardmen, where you could see 12-20 units.

Two weeks ago, I played a 2 S'Tank Empire player. I rolled up the angry Khorne effect. The only unit on his side where I rolled a six was his Engineer. The template deviated off and hit nothing.

It's really not that big a deal. It has the potential to be pretty awesome, but in the vast majority of cases, the RoC table does a couple of wounds during the entire course of the game, and that's about it. I literally haven't had a single game where it has made a measurable difference. I would have killed more models over the course of the game with a unit of 10 goblin archers.

Oh, to finish up about that game. The RoC table literally didn't kill a single model against the Empire. By the time I was making my second roll on the table, I had three units not in combat, and he had five units not in combat. The 5, 6, 8, and 9 results do not affect units in combat. From turn 2 onward, only a small fraction of the total units on the board weren't in combat, and that number dropped as the game went on because units were either dead or in combat.

I didn't say it would wipe out the enemy. But it's simple math to say it's a whole lot better that Empire tests every single unit not in combat as opposed to not testing anything ever. That can't really be up for discussion can it?

Anecdotal evidence isn't statistical. The first time you use a Greater Daemon it might have died to a gnoblar, that doesn't mean GD suck. Or they're worse than gnoblars.

The ability to put hits on enemy units anywhere on the battlefield during a phase you normally aren't directly attacking, taking no resources or attention from you at all (such as spell dice, or archers, or war machines) is pure, unadulterated bonus.

Whether it is powerful or not has no bearing on whether it works or not.

We have made the quantum leap and are debating both whether it works and whether or not even if it does work it's of any value.

Ah, I must have missed the first part in the last page +.

My bad.

HawaiiMatt wrote:

All my units testing half the time isn't nearly as bad as a much smaller fraction of your units half the time.

You really need to explain this. Assume both sides have 10 units. Testing for 10 units is self-evidently worse than testing for a fraction of 10. How in the world can you debate that?

I think he said that in reverse. Cuz he went on to give arguments to the contrary.