Jump to content

El_Commi

Members
  • Posts

    8
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by El_Commi

  1. Yeah, I fully appreciate the fear of getting randomly exploded by a super rare roll. But in Warhammer those are the memorable moments. The problem with the 2/3 being the baseline damage for grunts is that you have to have a much higher starting health pool across the board (Avg damage is 9 v 24- assuming all hit with fails both values will be lower but retain their relative positions..) which could make games longer and more complex to play. I'd be surprised if GW designed games around the math, but they'll know what "feels" right for the objectives they're after.
  2. I really really loved Infinity. It was a beautiful, fun, cinematic game. With gorgeous models. But I couldn't get my mates to buy in, and I don't have the time for the massive ruleset
  3. I generally don't recall this being a thing, however it has been a while since I last played. IIRC, you had to activate a model on your turn. You couldn't skip. I played a number of tournaments and I never saw a turn skipped. In response to my other post, here's the correct probabilities. I ran them quickly in excel, them realized I didn't handle the permutations properly so had to redo it in R, (Im in work so skimmed through it hence the lazy math). Purple line is raw percentages. Yellow line is those same percentages bounded to the list of probabilities. Assuming all 8 hits deal damage (Treating 1's as a success cause the math is easier, although the probability distribution will look similar anyway) . Blue bar is 1/4, orange is 2/3. As you can see, orange has a tighter spread than blue. But, its min damage is significantly higher. Blue has higher range of outputs, but a much lower damage at the bottom end of the damage output. Once the probability of the expected damage is factored in, the damage curve over N games looks like this: Yes it is more predictable, but requires the game to be designed with tools to offset this higher damage at the lower end. Given the low probabilities of crit, this could make some for really grindy games. Edit, forgot to add average damage is : 9.43 for blue and 24.89 for orange
  4. Edit: Spreadsheet error. Will clarify.
  5. *edit: Spreadsheet error, see my next post for clarification* Malifaux M2E didn't have anything to prevent out-activations, (I can't speak for M3E), and the out activation strategy was integral to some aspects of the game, smaller model count lists have their own advantages and disadvantages, same as in any game. So I don't really see this as a major concern for Warcry tbh. What matters is how you react to the evolving game. I'm not sure of your math here. I'm getting 9.664470895 and 16.55482363 when I run the numbers. If you look at the graph below, I don't think this is as big an issue as you suggest. Grey line represents probability of 6's on that many die. Bounded to 0 and 8. The probability of at least one 6 is 0.53. The blue and orange lines represent damage. Each of these damage outputs maps on to a probabilistic outcome (assuming the dice is perfect). We can see that the most likely outcomes here show 2/3 as having higher damage. I mean, you are right in saying that the damage curve for 1/4 is much steeper than 2/3. However, the probability of hitting those higher damage values is quite slim. (The above assumes 8 attacks which all hit). But, once you factor in the probability the 2/3 has a much higher overall damage curve. And whilst minimizing the range of output matters for balance in a competitive setting ( I made similar arguments for competitive wow arena back in the day), in a game those... "oh Sh**" moments are what make it fun to play- provided they are not too common:which the probability damage curves above suggest they are not. In addition to discounting the probabilistic outcomes, your perspective discounts unit specific abilities that may hinder/mitigate crits and damage output which could further smooth out damage. (Although, I concede this does go both ways and it can enhance it)
  6. They've said that after every reveal though... at 4 it's middle earth stuff. Actually kinda disappointed with the AoS reveal - was hoping for updates on Forbidden Power, and maybe new Armies.. what's the big June release too?
  7. Yeah, I hadn't really put too much thought into it to be fair. but I just thought it was a very strange release. Like.. making the Harrows easy to build, but letting people only ever need one box? That seems daft. We have Dreadblade Harrows, Reikenor, and a Knight of Shrouds on a steed... but only 1 unit of Cavalry (Hexwraiths)? I could easily see a terrifying nighthaunt Cavalry army based of those 4 units, but not with the hero tax.
  8. You know. I kinda felt the same! I never understood why Dreadblades were hero's instead of units of heavy cavalry. It never really made sense. We have a lot of Hero units...
×
×
  • Create New...