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.

At 22 pts a git costs ~as much as 4 shoota boyz

4 Boyz produce .33*.5*.33*2*4 = .43 dead MEQs
1 git produces .33*.66*.33*2*3= .43 dead MEQs if moved
1 git produces .5*.66*.33*2*3= .65 dead MEQs if stationary

Assuming no cover.

Assuming cover git produces [(.33*.66*.33*3)+(.33*.66*.66*3)]/2=.32 dead MEQs if moved or [(.5*.66*.33*3)+(.5*.66*.66*3)]/2=.33+.66=.5 dead MEQs if stationary.

Stationary shooting seems more likely given the 6 inch range advantage which means that gitz outshoot Boyz against MEQs point-for-point. Inferior shooting against GEQs.

Git in assault against MEQ
Produces .5*.66*.33*4=.43 dead MEQs at I3
4 Boyz produce .5*.5*.33*3*4=.99 dead MEQs at I2

I hope we get more grot units in the elite sections. Kanz, sniperz, rebel grots, anything really. But the elite section is already so full... hopefully some beneficial rearranging happens, one way or another.

It seems GW forgets about how fragile a model is when costing it. 22 points for an Ork? That's an expensive Ork.

 TedNugent wrote:
At 22 pts a git costs ~as much as 4 shoota boyz

4 Boyz produce .33*.5*.33*2*4 = .43 dead MEQs
1 git produces .33*.66*.33*2*3= .43 dead MEQs if moved
1 git produces .5*.66*.33*2*3= .65 dead MEQs if stationary

Assuming no cover.

Assuming cover git produces [(.33*.66*.33*3)+(.33*.66*.66*3)]/2=.32 dead MEQs if moved or [(.5*.66*.33*3)+(.5*.66*.66*3)]/2=.33+.66=.5 dead MEQs if stationary.

Stationary shooting seems more likely given the 6 inch range advantage which means that gitz outshoot Boyz against MEQs point-for-point. Inferior shooting against GEQs.

Git in assault against MEQ
Produces .5*.66*.33*4=.43 dead MEQs at I3
4 Boyz produce .5*.5*.33*3*4=.99 dead MEQs at I2

But 4 Boyz = 4 wounds, while 1 Git = 1 wound, same armor save

Gits have 2 wounds. They are nobs after all.

Don't forget ap values.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
It seems GW forgets about how fragile a model is when costing it. 22 points for an Ork? That's an expensive Ork.

But other orcs are 6 points each and just as big as a threat. Use cheap orks as a screen. If a model/unit is expensive , present enough other cheaper targets to draw fire from them is my mentality.

It seems likely that fragile, high-cost units will get ways to make them tougher, via force fields and painboys. Whether they prove to be cost-efficient remains to be seen.

 TedNugent wrote:
At 22 pts a git costs ~as much as 4 shoota boyz

4 Boyz produce .33*.5*.33*2*4 = .43 dead MEQs
1 git produces .33*.66*.33*2*3= .43 dead MEQs if moved
1 git produces .5*.66*.33*2*3= .65 dead MEQs if stationary

Assuming no cover.

Assuming cover git produces [(.33*.66*.33*3)+(.33*.66*.66*3)]/2=.32 dead MEQs if moved or [(.5*.66*.33*3)+(.5*.66*.66*3)]/2=.33+.66=.5 dead MEQs if stationary.

Stationary shooting seems more likely given the 6 inch range advantage which means that gitz outshoot Boyz against MEQs point-for-point. Inferior shooting against GEQs.

Git in assault against MEQ
Produces .5*.66*.33*4=.43 dead MEQs at I3
4 Boyz produce .5*.5*.33*3*4=.99 dead MEQs at I2

Why as an orc player should I care about math hammer If I wanted math hammer I'd play a different army damnit! Now if you'll excuse me I need to camp by my door until my gitz on a roll get here

 Perfect Organism wrote:
It seems likely that fragile, high-cost units will get ways to make them tougher, via force fields and painboys. Whether they prove to be cost-efficient remains to be seen.

Who cares.

I WANT THE SQUAD OF ULTIMATE BAD ASSES.

We gots knives, Sharp sticks...

Orktavius wrote:
Why as an orc player should I care about math hammer If I wanted math hammer I'd play a different army damnit! Now if you'll excuse me I need to camp by my door until my gitz on a roll get here

The usefulness of mathematical probabilities of are independent of army choice.

NamelessBard wrote:


The usefulness of mathematical probabilities of are independent of army choice.

Perhaps. But averages are only one measure, and arguably the least important one in low-N samples such as 6-round games (in which few models act to their fullest in all 6 turns).

Relying on averages over equally, if not more important measures such as variance, std. deviation, etc.. in your "mathhammer" is a clear sign of grot-like mathematical incompetence.

 Zweischneid wrote:

NamelessBard wrote:


The usefulness of mathematical probabilities of are independent of army choice.

Perhaps. But averages are only one measure, and arguably the least important one in low-N samples such as 6-round games (in which few models act to their fullest in all 6 turns).

Relying on averages over equally, if not more important measures such as variance, std. deviation, etc.. in your "mathhammer" is a clear sign of grot-like mathematical incompetence.

Oh brother....

The maths that have been presented were competent for what they were. There's no need to use such a condescending tone to flame others.

 44Ronin wrote:

Oh brother....

The maths that have been presented were competent for what they were. There's no need to use such a condescending tone to flame others.

Competent for "what they were"?

If they were intended to provide any useful insights for a game such as Warhammer 40K, no they weren't competent.

If they had a different purpose I was not aware of, I apologize.

 Zweischneid wrote:

 44Ronin wrote:

Oh brother....

The maths that have been presented were competent for what they were. There's no need to use such a condescending tone to flame others.

Competent for "what they were"?

If they were intended to provide any useful insights for a game such as Warhammer 40K, no they weren't competent.

If they had a different purpose I was not aware of, I apologize.

I'm not really sure what you're talking about. I'm pretty terrible at math myself but the numbers presented made sense to me, and clearly illustrated that flash gitz aren't very effective for their cost in comparison to another, similarly-costed unit with the same role in the same codex.

If he made some error when doing said math then I'll leave that for someone smarter than myself to point out, but in any case I'd agree that your tone was entirely unnecessary and probably even breaking Rule #1.

 Zweischneid wrote:

 44Ronin wrote:

Oh brother....

The maths that have been presented were competent for what they were. There's no need to use such a condescending tone to flame others.

Competent for "what they were"?

If they were intended to provide any useful insights for a game such as Warhammer 40K, no they weren't competent.

If they had a different purpose I was not aware of, I apologize.

How about you tell us exactly how variation and sample size will alter his conclusions instead of being rude and nasty to people, eh?

If you think you know better, don't just say it, perhaps explain it?

 Zweischneid wrote:

NamelessBard wrote:


The usefulness of mathematical probabilities of are independent of army choice.

Perhaps. But averages are only one measure, and arguably the least important one in low-N samples such as 6-round games (in which few models act to their fullest in all 6 turns).

Relying on averages over equally, if not more important measures such as variance, std. deviation, etc.. in your "mathhammer" is a clear sign of grot-like mathematical incompetence.

Please post your probability function and show us your calculation of the standard deviation for Flash Git shooting. Then compare to the function and standard deviation for boyz shooting.

You must of course have these ready otherwise you would not be so quick to pour scorn and derision on others for their apparent lack of understanding of the mathematics behind statistics.

Also, a model does not need to "act to it's fullest" to achieve a mean performance as expected from simple averages. If we assume that the results would fit a non-skewed normal distribution (which is a fair assumption since the results of rolling dice are random) then a model acting to it's fullest would lie far to the right of the graph of the function. By contrast the greater majority of results would be close to the mean in the middle.

I've seen this confirmed in a lab by performing an experiment involving rolling silver ball bearings down an angled board with metal pins sticking out of it, resulting in the pins to land in different compartments along the bottom. The sample size was quite small as far as statistics goes but still produced a normal distribution curve. A squad of 10 flash gits puts out 30 shots a turn. Lets assume they get 4 turns of shooting. That is 120 shots over the whole game. That's probably a sufficient sample size to expect a normal distribution and hence the average result to be an effective measure of what they can be expected to do.

Can people not just play the game, rather than having all possible variations worked out before they have even bought the unit? Is this not a game of fun?

UltraPrime wrote:
Can people not just play the game, rather than having all possible variations worked out before they have even bought the unit? Is this not a game of fun?

I personally enjoy calculating averages to determine a rough estimate of different units effectiveness. It is part of my army building process. But then again I'm a physics student and we can be kinda weird.

UltraPrime wrote:
Can people not just play the game, rather than having all possible variations worked out before they have even bought the unit? Is this not a game of fun?

It's supposed to be, but a box of flash gitz costs $53.

So unless you just really, really want the models and don't care about performance anyway, it might be good to know whether or not they'll be worth buying. Since you won't get your $53 back and that's a big chunk of change to gamble like that.

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

UltraPrime wrote:
Can people not just play the game, rather than having all possible variations worked out before they have even bought the unit? Is this not a game of fun?

I personally enjoy calculating averages to determine a rough estimate of different units effectiveness. It is part of my army building process. But then again I'm a physics student and we can be kinda weird.

The world would be a far less interesting place without the weird ones

I don't mind all the maths but all I really care about is MOAR DAKKA!

From the gw blog:

"After chatting to the Mathboyz in the toof-countin' department, we worked out that with all these components taken into account, there are a whopping 1,408,942,080 ways to build a Snazzgun."

Dats a whole lotta dakka!

Also says they'll be looking at Badrukk tomorrow so he is definitely still in.

Thanks for the math. So as I usually play again IG I might consider to take my old Shootaboyz against this brand new kit.
But don't forget that for the moment, Flashgitz can take a BW as dedicated transport vehicle while Shootas can only embark in a Trukk.
This makes a huge difference, I think. I don't really now how double-FOC works in 7th edition, though.

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

UltraPrime wrote:
Can people not just play the game, rather than having all possible variations worked out before they have even bought the unit? Is this not a game of fun?

I personally enjoy calculating averages to determine a rough estimate of different units effectiveness. It is part of my army building process. But then again I'm a physics student and we can be kinda weird.

Which is fine. The mistake is going backwards, and pretending a rough estimate gives you grounds to criticise game design.

if you build two houses in two cities with an average yearly temperature of 20 degrees, you'll still need very different houses and isolation, if the std. variation in one is huge (very cold, and very hot days), while the std. variation in another very small. The former house will likely be far more expensive.




Same could be said for two 40K units with the same average damage output. Depending on play-style, the one with lower std. variation could be "worth more" in points, because it will deliver an average result more regularly (and will be less dependent on you having a back-up, as it will fall short less often).

Different arguments could be made.

The point is, the argument that units with the same "average" damage output should be costed identically is wrong.

Aren't we going off topic JUST A LITTLE here?

PapaSoul wrote:
People don't like the Flash Gitz?? Am I looking at the same models? They got more Gubbinz than you can shake a squig at!

I dont care for them personally. they look stupid even by orc standards.

looking at the one guy in the 360 maybe you can help me out. did putting that cable into the squid turn it into a targeting computer somehow? is he holding those two giant shells with his teeth? (i cant really figure out what the hell is supposed to be going on there). he has a double gun and another gun attached to those guns that drags on the ground behind him and shoots backwards? or does his weapon double as a leaf blower and that part just puts out exhaust, again i cant really figure out what the hell is going on there. Why does he hold his sword out when firing that giant weapon? he looks like he's dressed for halloween, did the orcs just finish trickortreating?

probably since im over the age of 8 i am not that impressed.

Which means you are actually making the exact same argument as everyone else. So far, no poster has actually disagreed with another poster.

In efect, what we are all saying to one another is:

Knowing how many wounds the flashgits will produce against the most common targets, and then comparing them to a similar unit that does almost the same thing in the same manner is very useful. For those wondering, vs MEQ 10 stationary Gits will average the exact same number of (pre-save) wounds as 30 shoota boys, with the same effective range (24" range and stationary vs 6" move and 18" range), before their random AP is taken into account. Both units pour out an enormous number of dice and will have a comparable distribution of results.

One then must consider how the flashgits random AP value functions in converting those wounds into unsaved wounds. This rule creates a relatively minor effect against against a 5+ for example, both due to the smaller boost, and high chance it will be active (83.3% of the time), while on the other side of the spectrum, they have a 33.3% chance to average 600% more unsaved wounds than they would had they not made the AP roll (400% more vs TEQ 2+/5++).

One must also consider that Gits are S5 compared to the boys S4, which means they will perform much better against T5 and T6 targets, meaning they can effectively engage a broader range of targets.

Then after all of that, the flashgits durability themselves must be taken into account, where they are lacking compared to many other ork units.

Hence, Flashgits are a glass cannon unit, who would rely on a battlewagon for durability, and that rely on relatively rare occurrences that boost their firepower from average and unremarkable, to superb, but which might not matter against some opponents or not happen within a given game. For example, if stationary Gits do get AP1-2 when shooting at a riptide, and then burn all of their ammo grots, they will almost one shot the riptide, on average.

Only thing useful that came from that conversation is the rumour in Zweischneid's sig.

Ghazghull as Primarch-style LoW? On a similar power scale to LoW heroes in 30k? Yes fething please.