Wonder how I missed Ghouls being Ld 5. I guess I'll take back part of what I said. S5 Ghouls is quite the improvement, too bad that errata kills off its use for Skeletons and Zombies.
Suddenly...Ghouls!
- Thread starter Narenzade
- Start date
-
The masquerade of murder returns! A new game of Vampires Amongst Us has begun. Unmask the killers, trust no one, and try to survive the night. Find out more and sign up now!
Vectra said:that is exactly my point. they do NOT benefit more than other units do from it. the increase in damage output will be 50% (assuming you hit on 4+) weather you have poison or not. Intuition tells us that "yes, they should get more poison hits and therefore do more damage" but when you check the maths you will discover that the damage increase in % is the same no matter if you have poison or not.
i usually do not present my maths in such a manner as you do above, since it takes a very long time to type. i do not even calculate it that way since i long ago sat down and did an awesome excel sheet that do these calculations for me in a matter of seconds (i really like mathhammer if you hadnt noticed). but since you do not seem to believe me i will show you the math again.
Lets take another example. you hit something with WS3, T6 and a no save. For arguments sake lets assume that you have 40 attacks from the ghouls. This is a prime example of where poison is awesome, right? (and yes it is)
40 attacks -> 6,67 poison + 13,33 hits + 20 misses
13,33 hits -> 2,22 wounds
total: 6,67 + 2,22 = 8,89 wounds caused
with VHDM
40 attacks -> 6,67 poison + 13,33 hits + 20 misses
20 rerolled attacks -> 3,33 poison + 6,67 hits + 10 misses
13,33 + 6,67 hits = 20 hits -> 3,33 wounds
total: 6,67 + 3,33 + 3,33 = 13,33 wounds
the difference then is: 13,33/8,89 = 1,5 = an increase by 50%
Just to dispel any doubts i will do the same maths for the GG. Remember that they do not have the banner so they also hit on 4+ but since they gave GWs they will wound on 4+.
30 attacks -> 15 hit + 15 miss
15 hits -> 7,5 wounds
with VHDM
30 attacks -> 15 hit + 15 miss
15 rerolled misses -> 7,5 hits
15 + 7,5 = 22,5 hits -> 11,25 wounds
the difference is 11,25/7,5 = 1,5 = an increase by 50%
I hope that satisfies. If you can find a flaw with the maths, go ahead and show it
Math-Hammer!
But what if your awesome and the rules of averages do not apply because your dice are loaded?
Tamodan Varison
Grave Guard
Concerning the math-hammer proving VHDM doesn't benefit Ghouls more:
1. It's ridiculous to tell someone statistics don't count. Thinking in averages works. Most of the time. That's the nature of statistics. When they get very complicated, it's often a good thing to be suspicious. Rarely so in Warhammer. If you never count on statistics, you're probably not a good Warhammer player. But when you decide you won't charge your Skeletons into the Daemonettes, 'cause they'll lose, you're already using statistics. Statistics in Warhammer aren't bad. They're good, necessary and allow us to play more strategically.
2. Still, the guys arguing that Ghouls benefit more from VHDM are actually right. That's because Warhammer isn't measured in precentages, but in actual wounds. In the example you drew up Vectra, which is mathematically fine, the amount of wounds Ghouls do is increased by about 4. If you do the same thing with Skeletons, it's about 1 wound they gain. Hence, Ghouls benefit more from VHDM than Skeletons
1. It's ridiculous to tell someone statistics don't count. Thinking in averages works. Most of the time. That's the nature of statistics. When they get very complicated, it's often a good thing to be suspicious. Rarely so in Warhammer. If you never count on statistics, you're probably not a good Warhammer player. But when you decide you won't charge your Skeletons into the Daemonettes, 'cause they'll lose, you're already using statistics. Statistics in Warhammer aren't bad. They're good, necessary and allow us to play more strategically.
2. Still, the guys arguing that Ghouls benefit more from VHDM are actually right. That's because Warhammer isn't measured in precentages, but in actual wounds. In the example you drew up Vectra, which is mathematically fine, the amount of wounds Ghouls do is increased by about 4. If you do the same thing with Skeletons, it's about 1 wound they gain. Hence, Ghouls benefit more from VHDM than Skeletons
Of course VHDM benefits ghouls more than skeletons, but that is not because the ghouls have poison, but because they are a better unit. 50% of a large number of wounds is obviously more than 50% of a small number of wounds. My whole point was that poison in itself does not have any particular synergy with re-roll to hit rolls.
And you would be wrong to say that Ghouls don't benefit from it more, Vectra.
To say an elite (read: special) unit benefits more than a core unit from Vanhel's is utterly pointless. Our Grave Guard are clearly better than ghouls in every possible way; pointing that out is an exercise in futility.
The point you're blatantly overlooking is that ghouls only have Strength 3. This means that against most units (read: Toughness 4) they will only wound on rolls of 5 or better. That said, ghouls need as many wounds from poison as they can get. As such, they benefit more from Vanhel's than other units in this regard, as the bonus wounds from poison attacks can and often will allow them to actually win a combat instead of getting trounced.
To say an elite (read: special) unit benefits more than a core unit from Vanhel's is utterly pointless. Our Grave Guard are clearly better than ghouls in every possible way; pointing that out is an exercise in futility.
The point you're blatantly overlooking is that ghouls only have Strength 3. This means that against most units (read: Toughness 4) they will only wound on rolls of 5 or better. That said, ghouls need as many wounds from poison as they can get. As such, they benefit more from Vanhel's than other units in this regard, as the bonus wounds from poison attacks can and often will allow them to actually win a combat instead of getting trounced.
You all can use all the math you wish, but unless its applied correctly, it wont tell you anything.
Someone do the math on a horde of ghouls attacking toothcracked Ogres (T5) Lets assume everyone gets to fight as the ogres are 4 wide.
Now add rerolls for vhdm.
How many wounds?
Lets see the same math for a horde of skellys with spears.
Now add rerolls for vhdm.
How many wounds?
Oh wait... we have to roll to wound!
Please tell me how rerolling does not affect poisoned attacks.
Someone do the math on a horde of ghouls attacking toothcracked Ogres (T5) Lets assume everyone gets to fight as the ogres are 4 wide.
Now add rerolls for vhdm.
How many wounds?
Lets see the same math for a horde of skellys with spears.
Now add rerolls for vhdm.
How many wounds?
Oh wait... we have to roll to wound!
Please tell me how rerolling does not affect poisoned attacks.
pointing out that ghouls are better than skeletons is much more futile imo (they cost TWICE the points). As i said, and as the math proves, THERE IS NO SPECIAL SYNERGY BETWEEN REROLLS TO HIT AND POISON. a good combat unit will benefit from the spell more since it simply results in a flat %-increase of damage. If you have two units that will do the same amount of wounds in a given case, but one has poison and the other does not, they will both benefit equally well from VHDM (assuming they both require the same score to hit, as i also point out in my earlier posts). it does not matter that ghouls only have S3 and an opponent might have high toughness. either take my word for it, or do the maths and try and prove me wrong. i know its counter intuitive and i know many ppl believe differently, but this is simply how it works.
@Bat
40 ghoul attacks vs ogres (WS3, T5, 5+AS 6+ ward) will do 4,94 wounds. 7,41 with VHDM (thats a 50% damage increase)
40 skeleton attacks vs the same ogres will do 1,85 wounds. 2,78 wounds with VHDM (also a 50% damage increase)
see? astoundingly it worked out as i said yet again :O
@Bat
40 ghoul attacks vs ogres (WS3, T5, 5+AS 6+ ward) will do 4,94 wounds. 7,41 with VHDM (thats a 50% damage increase)
40 skeleton attacks vs the same ogres will do 1,85 wounds. 2,78 wounds with VHDM (also a 50% damage increase)
see? astoundingly it worked out as i said yet again :O
Lets take math completely out of the equation.
You are telling me that a model that, if rolls a 6 to hit, automatically inflicts a wound does not benefit more from rerolling its misses than a model that has to roll to wound for all of its hits?
Pretend ghouls didnt have poison.
At 40 attacks, with rerolls from vhdm,, they now have to roll to wound with their 10 sixes they rolled, resulting in 5 wounds.
Orrrr..... 5 less wounds than they would have had with poison.
You are telling me that a model that, if rolls a 6 to hit, automatically inflicts a wound does not benefit more from rerolling its misses than a model that has to roll to wound for all of its hits?
Pretend ghouls didnt have poison.
At 40 attacks, with rerolls from vhdm,, they now have to roll to wound with their 10 sixes they rolled, resulting in 5 wounds.
Orrrr..... 5 less wounds than they would have had with poison.
Vectra is right in all points. Of course you inflict more wounds with poison. This is the point about poison anyway, isn't it? But lets assume:
Poison, without reroll: 40 attacks, 20 hits (on 4+), 6.66 of which are poison so no roll to wound, 13.33 need to roll > 2.22 wound (T5) = 8.88 wounds
Poison, with reroll: 40 attacks, 20 hits, 6.66 poison; 20 miss > reroll > 10 hits of which 3.33 poison, 20 need to roll to wound = 13.32 wounds
> exactly an increase of 50%
No poison, without reroll: 40 attacks, 20 hits, all need to roll to wound = 3.33 wounds
No poison, with reroll: 40 attacks, 20 hits, 20 misses > reroll > 10 hits, 30 hits need to roll to wound = 5
> exactly an increase of 50%
Vectras point is, that if you get the chance to reroll your "to hit" roll, you will increase your wounds by 50% of the "without-reroll"... and this is true for each situation. Of course you are right that a "better" unit will do more wounds (resulting from the reroll) but this is just because it would have done more without the reroll on the first point...
Poison, without reroll: 40 attacks, 20 hits (on 4+), 6.66 of which are poison so no roll to wound, 13.33 need to roll > 2.22 wound (T5) = 8.88 wounds
Poison, with reroll: 40 attacks, 20 hits, 6.66 poison; 20 miss > reroll > 10 hits of which 3.33 poison, 20 need to roll to wound = 13.32 wounds
> exactly an increase of 50%
No poison, without reroll: 40 attacks, 20 hits, all need to roll to wound = 3.33 wounds
No poison, with reroll: 40 attacks, 20 hits, 20 misses > reroll > 10 hits, 30 hits need to roll to wound = 5
> exactly an increase of 50%
Vectras point is, that if you get the chance to reroll your "to hit" roll, you will increase your wounds by 50% of the "without-reroll"... and this is true for each situation. Of course you are right that a "better" unit will do more wounds (resulting from the reroll) but this is just because it would have done more without the reroll on the first point...
Statistically speaking vhdm will net any unit 50% more wounds than without rerolls. Nobody can argue that.
That is a static percentage that when applied to any number will yield the same result.
But.... we are talking about poison's benefit. Not the percentage of wounds increase, but the actual wounds.
Poisons ability to remove rolling to wound profoundly adjusts the damage output when compared to non poisoned attacks.
Its not about skellys vs ghouls, or t3 or t5, its about wounds. And by removi.g one of the factors i. the equation(rolling to wound), ghouls cause more wounds as a direct result of having poison and rerolling to hit.
That is a static percentage that when applied to any number will yield the same result.
But.... we are talking about poison's benefit. Not the percentage of wounds increase, but the actual wounds.
Poisons ability to remove rolling to wound profoundly adjusts the damage output when compared to non poisoned attacks.
Its not about skellys vs ghouls, or t3 or t5, its about wounds. And by removi.g one of the factors i. the equation(rolling to wound), ghouls cause more wounds as a direct result of having poison and rerolling to hit.
Again, Im not arguing that 50% is the standard increase in damage, as that is 100% true.
You stated poison attacks do not benefit more than non poisoned when rerolling to hit.
Let's apply some REAL math... using yours earlier.
No poison nets 3.33 wounds on 40 attacks
with rerolls you net 5 wounds.
Poison nets 8.88 wounds on 40 attacks
with rerolls you net 13.32 wounds.
When you compare probabilty of poison to wound vs. non poison with rerolls you'll find.
.08(%of wounding of non poisoned) / .22 (% of wounding poisoned)= .3636
Now add rerolls to the mix.
.125( % of wounding non poisoned with reroll)/ .33(% of wounding poisoned with reroll) =.3787
An increase of 1.5% probabilty to wound.
You stated poison attacks do not benefit more than non poisoned when rerolling to hit.
Let's apply some REAL math... using yours earlier.
No poison nets 3.33 wounds on 40 attacks
with rerolls you net 5 wounds.
Poison nets 8.88 wounds on 40 attacks
with rerolls you net 13.32 wounds.
When you compare probabilty of poison to wound vs. non poison with rerolls you'll find.
.08(%of wounding of non poisoned) / .22 (% of wounding poisoned)= .3636
Now add rerolls to the mix.
.125( % of wounding non poisoned with reroll)/ .33(% of wounding poisoned with reroll) =.3787
An increase of 1.5% probabilty to wound.
Sorry, bat, but you've got some rounding error here:
3.33333333333333333333333/40=0.08333333333333333333333333333
8.88888888888888888888888/40=0.22222222222222222222222222222
0.08333333333333333333333/0.2222222222222222222222222= 0.375
5/40=0.125
13.3333333333333333333333/40=0.33333333333333333333333333333
0.125/0.333333333333333333333333= 0.375
So please believe us. I did the exact math you suggested for right (which it actually is... the math, not the result). Unfortunately you used the rounded results that I've posted. In fact, with this calculation you just divide the same numbers, only multiplied with a factor of 1.5. So why should there be another result in the second one?...
3.33333333333333333333333/40=0.08333333333333333333333333333
8.88888888888888888888888/40=0.22222222222222222222222222222
0.08333333333333333333333/0.2222222222222222222222222= 0.375
5/40=0.125
13.3333333333333333333333/40=0.33333333333333333333333333333
0.125/0.333333333333333333333333= 0.375
So please believe us. I did the exact math you suggested for right (which it actually is... the math, not the result). Unfortunately you used the rounded results that I've posted. In fact, with this calculation you just divide the same numbers, only multiplied with a factor of 1.5. So why should there be another result in the second one?...
I think what Bat is saying is that:
Re-rolls with Poisoned Attacks will have a better chance of landing a Poisoned Attack (statistically). Those Poisoned attacks are no longer subject to the (sometimes minimal but still possible) failure to wound on the "To Wound" roll.
Given the WS of Ghouls, they should be slightly enhanced. He is just discounting the probability to fail Wounding with some attacks.
Maybe the synergy is not that impressive by the numbers, but it is a nice upgrade, or so I believe.
Re-rolls with Poisoned Attacks will have a better chance of landing a Poisoned Attack (statistically). Those Poisoned attacks are no longer subject to the (sometimes minimal but still possible) failure to wound on the "To Wound" roll.
Given the WS of Ghouls, they should be slightly enhanced. He is just discounting the probability to fail Wounding with some attacks.
Maybe the synergy is not that impressive by the numbers, but it is a nice upgrade, or so I believe.
No, what Bat is trying to say is the actual wounds, not the percentage. Yes, the percentage is typically a 50% increase across the board. No one is refuting that. Some of you don't understand that we are not refuting that.
What we are refuting, however, is your stance that ghouls benefit less than other units do. Are you ready for the last part you've completely ignored?
Units that typically deal more wounds WILL deal more wounds when buffed by VDM. That's where your math is flawed; while the percentage is generally the same across the board, the end result is NOT the same, as the "default" amount of wounds (read: the amount of wounds based on statistical averages before Vanhel's) for ghouls is higher than skeletons, but lower than grave guard.
If you do not understand this, I will draw you a map and explain more clearly. In fact, I'll even post the math for you. Once again, the percentages are not what's being argued. The end result -- and actual number -- are.
What we are refuting, however, is your stance that ghouls benefit less than other units do. Are you ready for the last part you've completely ignored?
Units that typically deal more wounds WILL deal more wounds when buffed by VDM. That's where your math is flawed; while the percentage is generally the same across the board, the end result is NOT the same, as the "default" amount of wounds (read: the amount of wounds based on statistical averages before Vanhel's) for ghouls is higher than skeletons, but lower than grave guard.
If you do not understand this, I will draw you a map and explain more clearly. In fact, I'll even post the math for you. Once again, the percentages are not what's being argued. The end result -- and actual number -- are.
i have never argued that 50% of a large number is not higher than 50% of a small number. see post #31 where i addressed that question. i did not mention it directly in my first post (since it is so painfully obvious) but i did it in post #31. that issue is not being ignored or argued against.
ill do one last ditch effort for any non believers out there. lets forget ghouls a while, and instead talk about crypt horrors and vargheists. lets assume that you have 5 crypt horrors (CHs) and 4 Vargheists (VGs). the CHs also have a champion (this is just for this particular example). They are both fighting a target with WS4, T6 and a 4+ AS (i made these up just to get even numbers).
since i arranged the numbers so cleverly, it means that both the CHs and the VGs will do on average 2,22 wounds.
how lets cast VHDM on both units and see what happens. if poison had any special synergy it should show up here since it is a high toughness target. most of the wounds CHs do will come from poison.
VGs will get a 50% increase in damage (obviously) and will thus do 3.33 wounds on average.
lets do the maths in detail fro CHs:
15 attacks -> 2,5 poison + 5 hits + 7,5 misses
rerolling the 7,5 misses -> 1,25 poison + 2,5 hits + 3,75 misses
5 + 2,5 = 7,5 hits -> 1,25 wounds
2,5 poison + 1,25 poison + 1,25 wounds = 5 wounds before saves
a modified save of 5+ -> 3,33 wounds after saves
This is all i have ever tried to prove in this thread. There is no mystical special bonus to combining rerolls to hit with poison. if two units preform equally well without VHDM they will preform equally well with VHDM even if one of them has poisoned attacks and the other does not. I have never tried to argue that ghouls are not better at fighting than skeletons or any other outrageous thing. this is all i have ever tried to argue.
ill do one last ditch effort for any non believers out there. lets forget ghouls a while, and instead talk about crypt horrors and vargheists. lets assume that you have 5 crypt horrors (CHs) and 4 Vargheists (VGs). the CHs also have a champion (this is just for this particular example). They are both fighting a target with WS4, T6 and a 4+ AS (i made these up just to get even numbers).
since i arranged the numbers so cleverly, it means that both the CHs and the VGs will do on average 2,22 wounds.
how lets cast VHDM on both units and see what happens. if poison had any special synergy it should show up here since it is a high toughness target. most of the wounds CHs do will come from poison.
VGs will get a 50% increase in damage (obviously) and will thus do 3.33 wounds on average.
lets do the maths in detail fro CHs:
15 attacks -> 2,5 poison + 5 hits + 7,5 misses
rerolling the 7,5 misses -> 1,25 poison + 2,5 hits + 3,75 misses
5 + 2,5 = 7,5 hits -> 1,25 wounds
2,5 poison + 1,25 poison + 1,25 wounds = 5 wounds before saves
a modified save of 5+ -> 3,33 wounds after saves
This is all i have ever tried to prove in this thread. There is no mystical special bonus to combining rerolls to hit with poison. if two units preform equally well without VHDM they will preform equally well with VHDM even if one of them has poisoned attacks and the other does not. I have never tried to argue that ghouls are not better at fighting than skeletons or any other outrageous thing. this is all i have ever tried to argue.
Essentially, what it boils down to is this:
1) All units gain the same percentage increase to their damage output when under the effects of VDM
2) Ghouls, due to their larger initial output, gain a larger numerical increase to their damage output when under the effects of VDM than Skeletons
In conclusion:
All other things being equal, Ghouls are a better choice for VDM than Skeletons as they will increase the amount of actual wounds done by a larger amount than Skeletons.
1) All units gain the same percentage increase to their damage output when under the effects of VDM
2) Ghouls, due to their larger initial output, gain a larger numerical increase to their damage output when under the effects of VDM than Skeletons
In conclusion:
All other things being equal, Ghouls are a better choice for VDM than Skeletons as they will increase the amount of actual wounds done by a larger amount than Skeletons.
I think Vectra did a nice job in bringing out the fact about the 50% increase in damage output, but is somewhat blinded what the 'non-believers' are actually talking about, and now this thread is stuck in an argument where everyone's right.
Let's put it this way:
My horde of 40 skeletons are fighting a block of beastmen, and my horde of 40 Ghouls are next to them, against an identical foe. If I have to choose one target for VDM I would always pick the ghouls. Because the sheer number of wounds that the ghouls will inflict is greater than those of the skeletons. The increase will be 50% damage output for both, but as my ghouls do more damage, I will net more inflicted wounds (in the number of) when I use VDM on them.
This is not to question your logic Vectra, but you kind of derailed this thread with your OT point about who benefits more about VDM, when your opening statement left open should we focus on the percentages or the amount of wounds actually inflicted. The relative effectiveness is the same, an increase of 50% for anyone, but when VDM is used on troops with a good base damage output (and the poison rule just increases damage output), the benefit in net wounds will win you more combats and make opponents lose more points.
But your point about the 50% increase is a good reminder, that everyone should have a decent idea what is the difference in damage output between their units and which one to target with VDM to get the most out of their damage potential and win the most points.
Vectra, I will give you one last anecdote to point out where the flaw in your thinking is here, when you focus only on the percentages (which are right):
Mr. Smith earns 1200$ a month and Mrs. Smith earns 4500$ a month. They live under the same roof and work in the same factory. One day the factory owner comes and says to them: "I will give either of you a raise of 50% on your salary, you can choose which one gets it." Which one should get the raise, to get the most benefit for their household?
I'm thinking that in terms of dollars, one of them will benefit more from the 50% raise...
Let's put it this way:
My horde of 40 skeletons are fighting a block of beastmen, and my horde of 40 Ghouls are next to them, against an identical foe. If I have to choose one target for VDM I would always pick the ghouls. Because the sheer number of wounds that the ghouls will inflict is greater than those of the skeletons. The increase will be 50% damage output for both, but as my ghouls do more damage, I will net more inflicted wounds (in the number of) when I use VDM on them.
This is not to question your logic Vectra, but you kind of derailed this thread with your OT point about who benefits more about VDM, when your opening statement left open should we focus on the percentages or the amount of wounds actually inflicted. The relative effectiveness is the same, an increase of 50% for anyone, but when VDM is used on troops with a good base damage output (and the poison rule just increases damage output), the benefit in net wounds will win you more combats and make opponents lose more points.
But your point about the 50% increase is a good reminder, that everyone should have a decent idea what is the difference in damage output between their units and which one to target with VDM to get the most out of their damage potential and win the most points.
Vectra, I will give you one last anecdote to point out where the flaw in your thinking is here, when you focus only on the percentages (which are right):
Mr. Smith earns 1200$ a month and Mrs. Smith earns 4500$ a month. They live under the same roof and work in the same factory. One day the factory owner comes and says to them: "I will give either of you a raise of 50% on your salary, you can choose which one gets it." Which one should get the raise, to get the most benefit for their household?
I'm thinking that in terms of dollars, one of them will benefit more from the 50% raise...
@ datalink7: Thank you, for writing this so clearly. I hope everyone will be satisfied with this answer.
@ Demian: I hope you, too, will accept this. If you have to rely on the poison to auto-wound (because of the high T for example) you will as well get just an increase of 50%. How many in numbers depends on the original amount.
@ Tobias: We never said that Gouls benefit less. They benefit equal as every other unit. And math is never wrong if you do it right ;-)...
@ Raizi: Speaking in terms of money, you are of course right. But sometimes you want to buff the weaker unit so that it can actually achieve something. If my ghouls are fighting a unit they will easily beat in combat and possibly break then I will always target the skeletons which have possibly some problems with just the same enemy unit...
-
But please stop arguing about the same issue over and over. Read the post from datalink7. I think he explains it very well. Or do the math for yourself with whichever situation you feel comfortable with. Numbers don't lie...
@ Demian: I hope you, too, will accept this. If you have to rely on the poison to auto-wound (because of the high T for example) you will as well get just an increase of 50%. How many in numbers depends on the original amount.
@ Tobias: We never said that Gouls benefit less. They benefit equal as every other unit. And math is never wrong if you do it right ;-)...
@ Raizi: Speaking in terms of money, you are of course right. But sometimes you want to buff the weaker unit so that it can actually achieve something. If my ghouls are fighting a unit they will easily beat in combat and possibly break then I will always target the skeletons which have possibly some problems with just the same enemy unit...
-
But please stop arguing about the same issue over and over. Read the post from datalink7. I think he explains it very well. Or do the math for yourself with whichever situation you feel comfortable with. Numbers don't lie...
Velmates said:
But mere percentages can be misleading, when they hide the actual numbers. That's where the trap is when examining statistics. When one becomes two, the increase is 100% and looks nice, but it might not be enough when speaking of volume.
This argument can be viewed like this:
1) a 50% increase is a 50% increase, do the math! It's in the numbers!
2) But 6 (50% of 12) is more than 3,5 (50% of 7)
Yes, of course you are right. But take your money example: you earn 1200, your boss 2400. In any case you are underpaid and your CEO gives you both an increase based on your current salary. Now you earn 1800 and your boss 3600. Do you really want to mess with your CEO? Of course your boss earns more in total but each of you gets an increase of 50%.
I don't know why everyone ist so fond of the absolute numbers. Sure, a strong unit will do more damage with the rerolls. Obviously, isn't it (and proven right a couple of times...) ? But I think it is reassuring that you will help a weaker unit just all the same: increase their damage output by 50%. And this percentage remains the same, no matter if you are fighting a strong, a weak or whatever unit possible. Absolute numbers are always for one special case and therefore say nothing about statistics. Absolute numbers are hiding the truth behind, not the other way around. And a game in which it comes down to dice it's all about statistics. Statistics will equalize luck and bad luck. I hope everyone can see this truth.
I don't know why everyone ist so fond of the absolute numbers. Sure, a strong unit will do more damage with the rerolls. Obviously, isn't it (and proven right a couple of times...) ? But I think it is reassuring that you will help a weaker unit just all the same: increase their damage output by 50%. And this percentage remains the same, no matter if you are fighting a strong, a weak or whatever unit possible. Absolute numbers are always for one special case and therefore say nothing about statistics. Absolute numbers are hiding the truth behind, not the other way around. And a game in which it comes down to dice it's all about statistics. Statistics will equalize luck and bad luck. I hope everyone can see this truth.
You are also correct about that and neither numbers alone or plain percentages without understanding the numbers behind them are as useful as when you have both.
That's what I'm kind of trying to do, to find the bridge between the camps where there is actually no ground between them.
VDM is a very useful spell and if used correctly it can give even the weaker units the needed edge to win (or at least gain the odds for it, dice gods are fickle in GW games...), but you also need to know how many wounds the 50% increase actually is to be able to calculate it's effectiveness on the combat result right. This can be a bit tricky to get right in the heat of battle for most players, so the rule of thumb to use it on those with a good damage potential will reap greater benefits, when calculating victory points.
A great player will be able to max out it's effectiveness from marginal situations too, but if the value of the spent power dice and cast spell is measured by the actual amount of wounds caused, it is better to use it with units that do more damage. Therefore I'd like to challenge the argument about if 'ghouls benefit more from it than weaker units'.
It's actually not about if they benefit from it more, but if the player benefits from it more. So in the sense of killed enemy models and won victory points, it is more useful with good damage dealers.
That's what I'm kind of trying to do, to find the bridge between the camps where there is actually no ground between them.
VDM is a very useful spell and if used correctly it can give even the weaker units the needed edge to win (or at least gain the odds for it, dice gods are fickle in GW games...), but you also need to know how many wounds the 50% increase actually is to be able to calculate it's effectiveness on the combat result right. This can be a bit tricky to get right in the heat of battle for most players, so the rule of thumb to use it on those with a good damage potential will reap greater benefits, when calculating victory points.
A great player will be able to max out it's effectiveness from marginal situations too, but if the value of the spent power dice and cast spell is measured by the actual amount of wounds caused, it is better to use it with units that do more damage. Therefore I'd like to challenge the argument about if 'ghouls benefit more from it than weaker units'.
It's actually not about if they benefit from it more, but if the player benefits from it more. So in the sense of killed enemy models and won victory points, it is more useful with good damage dealers.