Boar

Just to be clear I am not talking about average, but distribution and variance. You can have same averages, but with different distribution. If you knew that good for you. I honestly wasn't sure. And just to further clarify it's normal order, just with +1 given once to one roll, than to another. Because first you write that order does't matter, and next sentence that it does, so I am not sure what you are saying. OK, this time you were clearer. This does not support conclusion that All out defense has lesser value. It simply works differently, ie. with similar "raw power", but with different variance. If that changes it's value for you this is your opinion, this is your preference, fine. But it's just that your preference, as across many games we will be playing in AoS 3.0, value of all out defense, much like save characterisitc itself will trend toward average. I already used this example, of elite attacks (40 of them) 3+/3+/-1 vs 4+ save. Where we can see that answering All out attack with All out defense lowers incoming damge even below what we could expect with no buffs on both sides. this time charts not mine, but courtsy of Stathammer interesting variance changes above But wait, there is more! If we don't answer all out attack, it drastically changes distribution in favor of attacking side. By using all out defense we are not only lowering expected average result. We are changing distribution that significantly increases chance of results that could be called failure for attacking side. As damage dealt has greater chance to not reach required threshold for achieving tactical goal by opponent. Or in other words introduces/increases uncertainity. There is still more! Now about gains from all out defense (or other such buffs) on lower number of rolls. As we can see moving one step (specifically from 4+ to 3+) on only 10 dice rolled, changes distribution of outcomes quite significantly. Mode changes from 5 to 7, and you have even not insignificant chance to roll 9 successes. done by me in excel, no sims, just binomial distribution So I would say conclusion is that we should not be afraid to boost lower number of rolls. They sure can fail more, but look how also lower results are reduced by this +1 buff. As bonus, change from 5+ to 4+, again only 10 dice Choice is yours dear reader, I know what I will do.

Double post, however something was bugging me. We are so far taking almost for granted that f.ex. 4+/4+profile will have less variance if to hit roll is buffed, than if to wound roll is buffed. Stemming mostly from smaller number of wound rolls. Even I granted it as such. This is distribution of attacks with either wounds or hits buffed by one. 5000 sequences of 20 attacks each. And one more: Third's the charm: It is another psychology thing, it sorta makes sense initially, untrue in the end.

You constantly get math wrong. Not too mention that your use of words like influence/value is lax that I am not really sure what you are referring too. Please Look at @Rachmanipost. You would gain 2 successes on average there. So again bad math. Unless you wanted to show something else in which case there is nothing supporting that line of tought there. If f.ex. one side boosts their elite attacks 3+ to hit, and -1 rend, and defender boosts their saves from 4+ to 3+ than damage inflicted on defender will be smaller. Relatively in this - I would say common situation - all out defense gives you slightly more. And it helps you vs other attacks that may be directed against that unit in that phase too! It is absolutely in similar "power level" or "utility" as all out attack And yes dice rolls are not statistical averages, we know. But rolls, their success rate is absolutely influenced by modifiers, and statistics gives us estimate of chances of succeding, and hence values of buffs. That some buffs will affect rolls with lower variance, and other with higher variance makes no difference in itself to outcomes across many games.

Downstream/upstream you are constantly refering to this. If we would take it seriously than f.ex. in attack profile where hit and wound values are the same, we would expect better return so to speak, from boosting to hit value, than to wound. In reality it does not, average values stays the same, what could be expected is different distribution. Downstream/upstream is just human psychology at work.

Your math is wrong however. If we assume your unit that you want to buff has 4+ to hit, than +1 to hit will increase overall damage by 33%. The same BTW will happen for increase in wound roll. Due to how it works in AoS hit roll is interchangable with wound roll. Defending unit moving from 4+ to 3+ save will need to suffer 50% more damage to be destroyed, of course assuming no rend. Save works as damage reduction, and math is different there, than it is with hit/wound rolls.

Not everyone plays Zilfin you know.

Didn't BoC lost their rules allowing them marks, or something? Maybe it will come out too patch this up?

It's just his base size really. If there are situations when line of sight could come up, just try to approximate if new model would be visible, or better yet just be genrous to your opponent and say he is visible. With no real LoS rules in AoS most models are visible most of the time anyway.

Hitching and fly high can explicitly trigger from retreat (look up in errata), so you still can retreat them from combat that way

In Spell in a Bottle there is quite important note: "all restrictions are ignored"

Yes, it is based on core rules. no further errata is necessary for that

Everyone lost reroll saves (Kurnoth, S2D etc), considering lot of ways to gain bonuses to save I think it needed to be done

With more ways to get bouns to save I guess it was inevitable, so Mark of Tzenntch boosted?

Erratas out, reroll saves are out from Chaos Warriors changed to +1 save, same on Oracular Visions

Erratas are out guys!

There is some valid concern here I think. KO player that sometimes is on Aethercast reported after his first games of 3.0 that often he would face targets with effective 2+ save (usually stronger units that start on 3+ already, with mix of cover, mystic shield, all out defense, finest hour, and in case of Seraphon their abilities and spells), and yes that is with -1 rend of KO taken into account. So in that case unleash hell could become very important to compete for army like KO.

If new article is portent of things to come, than unfortunately it won't happen https://www.warhammer-community.com/2021/06/29/bright-sparks-the-lumineth-realm-lords-shine-in-the-new-edition/ Bryan: Reinforced units of Vanari Sentinels can make excellent use of the Unleash Hell command ability, which can be issued by their unit champion. With Heightened Senses from Aetherquartz, they’ll be shooting without a negative modifier, and the Power of Hysh spell increases the chance of causing mortal wounds – definitely enough to make chargers think twice.

Strongly depends on maximum damage and number of shots I think. Gunhauler with Drill Cannon trigger MW on 5+, and 3MW at that. However it's all it got really, so on some sort of special/novelty weapons it works fine.

THere are abilities etc. that target models. So Gargants, Troggboss, Mortek Catapult comes to mind

So this (moves happen amogn others in combat phase) and this (pile-in move) There is no need for guessing, rules are out

No you absolutely cannot

I am not sure if you are saying that you can break coherency during pile-in. If so than no, you must end every move in coherency, and pile-in is move. If you are not saying that diregard this transmission.

Can't see why not. Points were paid, wizard can cast the spell, so it should work.

Effect can be applied at hero phase (yours or enemy's) in both cases next combat phase (not f.ex. "yours combat phase", it's literally just next combat phase, it cares not for who's comabt turn it is) will happen before battleshock phase.

Re: Pistoleers ability, my bad forgot about exact moment when it trigger. Tough on reflection large porblem would be that light cav as Pistoleers or Skywardens would like to choose were they charge to hopefully not die super horribly. And yes your proposed ability could be problematic sometimes, which would hurt even more short range missile troops as they would not only suffer countercharge, but also more critically trigger redeploy for enemy. But we kinda veered off topic why unleash hell exist at all. I said my piece earlier and looking trough your post I missed earlier I see your position is about your dislike for shooting how it is in AoS - ie. not restricted enough. Whereas for me it's tilted somewhat more towards balance (so I am waiting how unleash hell will affect that). So as we have different outlook on this, do you feel there is more to be discussed?