tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2620538724364147334.post6657119381468989443..comments2023-09-04T09:15:05.112-04:00Comments on Blame It On The Dice: 6th Edition Hull Points By the NumbersCaulynDarrhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14556761303500891267noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2620538724364147334.post-52053221491637778462012-07-27T05:46:42.580-04:002012-07-27T05:46:42.580-04:00>> This actually makes wave serpents slightl...>> This actually makes wave serpents slightly more survivable in 6th than 5th.<<<br /><br />Please note that this is only true for small numbers of hits, and quickly becomes the opposite once the number of hits increases. Considering S8 hits against a Wave Serpent, 8 hits and over would already show a greater chance of killing a WS in 6th than it was in 5th despite 5+ cover. Specifically for 8 hits it's 0.654 kill chance for 6th vs 0.610 kill chance for 5th.<br /><br /><br />0,654<br />0,61Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2620538724364147334.post-48691665420897686372012-07-26T07:23:28.694-04:002012-07-26T07:23:28.694-04:00I did some double checking on my math, and I do ha...I did some double checking on my math, and I do have an error for the wave serpent. I had 4/5 instead of 4/6 for getting past the cover save. Fixing the error gives the .34 result you where expecting for the cover save. I'll update the graph.<br /><br />This actually makes wave serpents slightly more survivable in 6th than 5th.CaulynDarrhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14556761303500891267noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2620538724364147334.post-53183498653422504362012-07-26T03:01:59.036-04:002012-07-26T03:01:59.036-04:00Greetings!
That's a nice article. However, wh...Greetings!<br /><br />That's a nice article. However, when I do the same calculations, I get very different figures from what I can see on your diagrams, at least for Wave Serpents. <br /><br />For example, consider firing at S8. I assume that by "5 hits" you mean 5 shots that have already hit and only roll for armour penetration. So, here are binomial probabilities of removing exactly X hp with 5 S8 hits that I get (rounded):<br /><br />Exactly 0 HP : 0,03<br />Exactly 1 HP : 0,16<br />Exactly 2 HP : 0,31<br />Exactly 3 HP : 0,31<br />Exactly 4 HP : 0,16<br />Exactly 5 HP : 0,03<br /><br />This gives me the probability of removing 3 or more HP P(hp) = 0,31+0,16+0,03 = 0,5<br /><br />Then, binomial probabilities of scoring exactly X penetrates with "Explodes" result with 5 S8 hits that I get are (rounded):<br />Exactly 0 Explosions : 0,75<br />Exactly 1 Explosions : 0,22<br />Exactly 2 Explosions : 0,03<br />Exactly 3 Explosions : 0,00<br />Exactly 4 Explosions : 0,00<br />Exactly 5 Explosions : 0,00<br /><br />This gives me the probability of scoring 1 or more 'explosion' P(explode) = 0,22+0,03 = 0,25<br /><br />Next, I calculate the total probability of a kill: P(kill) = P(hp) + P(explode) - P(hp)*P(explode) = 0,63<br /><br />If I factor in jink save (5+ cover), I get the following numbers.<br />For HP:<br />Exactly 0 HP: 0,13<br />Exactly 1 HP: 0,33<br />Exactly 2 HP: 0,33<br />Exactly 3 HP: 0,164<br />Exactly 4 HP: 0,041<br />Exactly 5 HP: 0,00<br />Probability of knocking off at least 3 HP is P(hp) = 0,164 + 0,041 = 0,21<br /><br />For explosion:<br />Exactly 0 Wounds : 0,83<br />Exactly 1 Wounds : 0,16<br />Exactly 2 Wounds : 0,01<br />Exactly 3 Wounds : 0,00<br />Exactly 4 Wounds : 0,00<br />Exactly 5 Wounds : 0,00<br />Probability of scoring 1 or more 'explosion' P(explode) = 0,16+0,01 = 0,17<br /><br />Effective probability of a kill: P(kill) = P(hp) + P(explode) - P(hp)*P(explode) = 0,34<br /><br />So I get 63% chance of killing a Wave Serpent with 5 S8 hits if it has no cover and 34% if it is in 5+ cover. Both results seem quite different from 45.62% that I see on your diagram.<br />BTW when I use the exact same macros to calculate the chance of "5th edition kill" I get the same result of 44,5% as you do. This gives me additional reason to suggest that your calculation of chances for 6th edition kill might be a bit off.<br /><br />Sorry for such a long comment.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2620538724364147334.post-61218497640844028312012-07-25T11:43:31.920-04:002012-07-25T11:43:31.920-04:00THIS... This is excellent. A man after my own hear...THIS... This is excellent. A man after my own heart. Well done.Purgatushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04434824912752472018noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2620538724364147334.post-48028377077364591772012-07-19T11:42:24.083-04:002012-07-19T11:42:24.083-04:00No I didn't factor that in. Those situations w...No I didn't factor that in. Those situations would be pretty rare, probably less than a 2% shift in probabilities. The probability getting an extra hull point this way would be less than blowing up a Land Raider with a Lascannon 2 times in a row. I don't think it would have a big effect on the trends.CaulynDarrhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14556761303500891267noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2620538724364147334.post-39760607064118448822012-07-19T11:31:56.856-04:002012-07-19T11:31:56.856-04:00Are you factoring in the damage results that cause...Are you factoring in the damage results that cause a vehicle to lose additional hull points? There's something of a hold-over from 5th edition where Weapon Destroyed results convert to Immobilized results, but additional Immobilized results convert to the loss of an additional hull point. Three Lascannon shots can wreck a Land Raider if two obtain immobilized results upon penetrating, for example.Nurglitchhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03333941626425462180noreply@blogger.com