Average wounds is not a great benchmark for making decisions. Lets do better.

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.

**Breng77**

DeviationOfWar wrote:
While the averages are quick and dirty, I think knowing the actual statistics would be better when you are taking a chance. Lets say there are 2 objectives, one with 4 marines on it, and one with 3 marines on it. You have an infantry squad with first rank second rank that can rapid fire either. Lets say you also have Celestine who can reach the 4 man squad with assault from an 8.5 in charge. If you overtake the one objective you can tie, but if you can kill the 4 with Celestine alone and the 3 with the infantry squad alone you can win. We assume Celestine makes her charge, because if not it wouldn't matter anyways.
Average wounds for 37 lasgun shots is 2.01, average wounds for Celestine is 2.78. Lets say the difference is between 1st 2nd and 5th in a tournament.
Do you
A) split your fire and go for the win? It is about 1 over with each, so it would take an above average round with both, but if your shooting fails, Celestine can still win it by herself.
B) Double down and play for the draw? Maybe more greater good than blood for the blood god.
Now if you are a grab your balls death or glory player you will go for it without a second though. But if you knew the odds would you? For option A, you have a 72% chance to lose, 18% chance to tie and a 9% chance to win. If you played it safe for second place, you would have a 76% chance of a draw, and a 24% chance to lose.

9% chance to win for an extra 48% chance to lose.

Now, I know this isn't practical to know every statistic, or to whip out a spreadsheet in the middle of a match, but having a rough idea of the rate at which they drop off is huge. Even if the table were reversed, you could do a little social engineering, "oh man, you could win if you clean them both up." And if you think this is rubbish, you are that person I can goad into making it so I have a 90% chance to not lose.

The issue is that you basically need to know a ton for it to actually work. What if instead of marines on the objectives those are Orks? What if they have a Pain boy near by? What if they are T3? T7? There are too many different cases to know all the odds.

What if you can focus the 4 man squad and charge the 3 IG with your guardsman to take that objective (you must be within 12", what if shooting the 4 man squad puts Celestine out of charge range, or at a worse charge range (chances are not all models are the same distance. Or shoot the 3 man and charge the 4 with the guardsman etc. Lots of options exist.

Using the average is usually good enough. If I saw the above averages I would likely say well that means I have a >50% chance to fail at killing each unit as the average fails on both, so I should overkill one. Which is the same decision your analysis yields.

Social engineering is a decent play, except when your opponent succeeds, or finishes your 3 marines on the charge.

**Sim-Life**

My problem with Mathammer is that ignores every other aspect of a model and reduces its value to just its ability to kill things.

Like how do you value distraction carnifex? Or playing on aa terrain heavy board? Or if the taxtical objectives are in your favor? You can't because it depends on how you or your opponent reacts to it. Averages don't account for a lot of variables in the game. Theres a problem on general with the wargaming community looking at stuff in a vacumn.

**Martel732**

Sim-Life wrote:
My problem with Mathammer is that ignores every other aspect of a model and reduces its value to just its ability to kill things.

Like how do you value distraction carnifex? Or playing on aa terrain heavy board? Or if the taxtical objectives are in your favor? You can't because it depends on how you or your opponent reacts to it. Averages don't account for a lot of variables in the game. Theres a problem on general with the wargaming community looking at stuff in a vacumn.

It still gives a baseline, which is important. I use mathhammer to temper my reactions. If the distraction carnifex can't hurt me, it's no longer a distraction, now is it? Also, units that are expensive, are called choice targets and cease being "distractions". This game still ultimately boils down to math, regardless of terrain, etc.