imperial tactics article part two - Warhammer 40K Fantasy
 

Welcome to Librarium Online!

Join our community of 80,000+ members and take part in the number one resource for Warhammer and Warhammer 40K discussion!

Registering gives you full access to take part in discussions, upload pictures, contact other members and search everything!


Register Now!

User Tag List

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 4 of 4
  1. #1
    Bearded Ninja Arklite's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Edinburgh
    Age
    27
    Posts
    2,678
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    ReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputation
    451 (x8)

    imperial tactics article part two

    Imperial tactics article part two: mean damage potential

    Well this is something I thought up the other day while revising for my maths.
    Basically I’m going to work out average damage potential for each ship in the imperial fleet list. (man ive got too much time on my hands) this will hopefully give people a better idea on which ships to employ for damage dealing or more ranged combat. I will however not be factoring in launch bays as they are very random in their damage when compared to gunbatts or lances. I’ll be adding torpedoes but as they are directly proportional to the targets armour as they are fairly easy to work out and so they will have their own table. Ill be factoring in range by use of a score multiplier. For every 15cm above 30cm a ships score will be given a 25% boost to represent the extra time shooting. (25% is not a worked out figure but one I felt fair.) so on with my random math. These tables are based on ships on their own as squadroning massively effects my system. It will also be assumed that gunbatts are fired before lances and that you are firing at non-eldar or necron ships. As most fleets don’t have “armour” saves. Shields will also not be counted as this is damage potential so all assumptions are made that the shields are down. The dauntless also has a X/Y value as its lances only face forwards. As you can already tell carrier ships are already at a disadvantage in my system and sadly there is nothing I can do to resolve this. I could only calculate direct damage weapons (torpedoes made it by the skin of their teeth.)

    With regards to gun batts I’ve done an average across the gunnery table using the mean system again. So the average for S6 gunbatts is 3 ie:

    5+4+3+2+1 = 15 15/5 = 3

    So on with the tables!!!!































    and i think we can all agree that i have too much time on my hands :rolleyes:

    Last edited by Arklite; May 13th, 2006 at 18:45.


    spambot kill tally: 79


    [16:19] <@Alzer> Arky's right though
    [16:20] <@Kaiser-> I know he is.
    [16:20] <@Kaiser-> He usually is.
    [16:20] <@Kaiser-> Sometimes it's intentional.
    ----
    [00:01] <+zubus> i love you, ya skirt wearin nothern monkey! ^_^

  2. Remove Advertisements
    Librarium-Online.com
    Advertisements
     

  3. #2
    Member Rogoth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    New Hampshire, USA
    Age
    46
    Posts
    183
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    ReputationReputation
    28 (x1)

    I hate to interject... But launch bays could be critical in a person's fleet choice. You'll have to find the average damage based on percentage chance to hit, based on number of squadrons the ship has. Assault Boats are what, two in six chance to hit? Bombers are... I'm not sure the numbers, but if they aren't included, your tables won't be complete.

    And as to your point about shields, I don't think that changes your percentage chance to hit. Unlike in other GW games, a hit is a damage point, except against Eldar and Necrons, so, I'd change it to "Mean hits generated", rather then "damage potential", as taking down shields is part of the game, and no less relevant then "damage" alone. Do that and it doesn't affect the math at all.

    Torpedoes make sense I think the way you have them, but you could simply include them in the damage table for the ship itself, no?
    BFG
    Cadian Enforcement Taskforce(1500) (3/3/2)
    40k
    181st Cadian (1500) (0/1/4)

  4. #3
    Son of LO Silver Wings's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    England.
    Age
    28
    Posts
    2,109
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    ReputationReputationReputationReputation
    99 (x5)

    I like it, but if you have that much time on your hands you should show it with Lock On, which helps GunBatts far more than Lances in my experiance.
    Every time you read this sig: a fairie dies!

  5. #4
    Bearded Ninja Arklite's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Edinburgh
    Age
    27
    Posts
    2,678
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    ReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputation
    451 (x8)

    indeed yes i could probebly work out the chances of bombers and launchbays but there are an incredible number of variables to include compared to regular weapons.

    firstly there is a good chance that bombers could be shotdown by turrets before they even attack.

    second the bombers attack is d6-turrets. so there is a chance that bombers do nothing at all. ill probebly have a go at working them out however as i have a free day tommorow and i have some rough ideas on how i could work them out. ill try a quick go tonight and probebly make a table for them tommorow with updated tables for the dictator and emperor classes.

    i kept torpedo's as a seperate table as , again, they are subject to turrets and i could not allways garrentee a S6 wave. it then made more sence to work out a table for all normal torpedeo values 2-9 which include the probeble values of strength of a torpedo wave hitting a ship.

    but for now ill try working out some math for bombers.

    [edit]

    well aftter a bit of math it turns out that my system is pretty flawed towards carriers but not in a bad way. after working out the following for when fighting a target with two turrets.

    4 squadrons
    2 turrets per target.
    1 squadron destroyed
    3 squadrons strike
    3 d6-2 rolls

    so after a bit of a long time working out combonations ive discovered that 4 bomber waves attacking a ship with two turrets have an average hit rating of 6.1

    this caught me pretty off guard but ive done the math over and got the same answer.

    this suddenly puts carriers into the highest scorers of my system with the dictaitor at 7.1 points and the emperorclass at a mighty 16.3(!) points.

    ill update the tables with this information tommorow as well as working out the averages for fighting against 3,4 and 5 turrested ships to get a true average value for bombers (i mean, 6 must be too high O_o it must be!)

    [edit two]

    well guess what, i forgot a variable!. my value of 6 was not averaged against armour types!. *slaps head* after redoing the average it comes out a much more reasonable score of two. the following edits will be made tommorow.

    dictator: launchbays added. score raised by 2
    mars: launchbays added. score raised by 2
    emperor : launchbays added. score raised by 4

    i will also not be factoring higher turret strengths anytime soon as most ships generally have a turret rating of two anyway and my score of two is quite adiquite for the moment.

    and for realism sake i will change it to mean hits potential. i only chose damage because it sounded so much cooler
    Last edited by Arklite; May 14th, 2006 at 23:58.


    spambot kill tally: 79


    [16:19] <@Alzer> Arky's right though
    [16:20] <@Kaiser-> I know he is.
    [16:20] <@Kaiser-> He usually is.
    [16:20] <@Kaiser-> Sometimes it's intentional.
    ----
    [00:01] <+zubus> i love you, ya skirt wearin nothern monkey! ^_^

+ Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts