What if we didn't use dice?

[Rogue]

Hello

 

First up, this isn't a serious suggestion. It's just an idea. I don't think it would really work in practice. But it was an interesting thought, and I figured I'd drop it here and see what people made of it.

 

In essence, I'm wondering what would happen if we did away with dice rolling, and replaced everything with math-hammer. 

 

For example: my marine fires at another marine. With dice, we have 3+ to hit, 4+ to wound, 3+ to save, possible dead marine. But instead, what if my marine always did 2/3 * 1/2 * 1/3 damage? That is, 0.1 damage (rounded to 1dp). So shooting ten marines would always mean one dead enemy marine (at long range, one shot, no cover). 

 

Again, this isn't really a practical way of playing - it would rely way too heavily on making calculations all the time, and keeping track of 0.7 wounds on models and so on. But stick with me.

 

If we could play games like this, would it serve to further highlight more skillful players?

 

In a game of dice, luck is a thing. And yes, on the grand scale, luck balances out. But within a single game, it might not. Sometimes you just have everything go your way, or go against you. But if we knock out dice rolling, then the influence of luck is largely removed. Suddenly, the game is decided by who can apply force in the right place at the right time against the right target. Less luck, more skill. Suddenly, you know exactly how effective your combat blob of genestealers is going to be against any target, and your opponent knows exactly how many he'll be able to gun down first with his assault cannon razorbacks. And so on.

 

So, would that be the case, or am I talking rubbish? (It's entirely possible.)

 

[And yes, I'm well aware that this really doesn't work in all areas. If you average everything, then, for instance, smite always goes off; you can never make an 8" charge without modifiers, and so on. But let's not get hung up on that. It's really the bigger picture that caught my attention in the first place.]

[Panzer]

Meh. Rolling dice is half the fun.

[MARK0SIAN]

I think taking away the dice would make most games a forgone conclusion.

 

It also wouldn’t necessarily highlight who was the most skilful player, but who could put together the best lists and would turn it into those card games where people know every possible combination and are impossible to beat.

 

Plus dice are fun :)

[Marshal Rohr]

The drama of a high stakes dice roll is half the dopamine inducing fun of the game.

[Ranulf]

Whether you're rolling an invulnerable save at the climax of a match, or playing Craps with your mortgage payment for the month; it's all about the dice drama baby.

 

-Ran

[Interrogator Stobz]

I calculated who would win and in what turn correctly for three out of six games I had at a tournament last year. The more dice you roll the more accurate the calculation.

8th is a boring math-hammer edition, you might as well not throw dice. ;)

It needs more spacial and intuitive aspects brought back.

 

I play Kill Team almost exclusively now, it is better than the main game due to the low numbers of rolls.

Edited August 28, 2019 by Interrogator Stobz

[Vermintide]

I've been mockingly suggesting that this should be how they play tournament games for a while now.

 

Just calculate the average for every unit against every other unit and have a reference table. Just imagine how BALANCED the game could be then!

 

I mainly consider this a thought experiment in highlighting the absurd nature of trying to treat Warhammer as competitive in the first place; but of course different strokes for different folks. Most of my opinions are controversial ;)

[Beams]

I calculated who would win and in what turn correctly for three out of six games I had at a tournament last year. The more dice you roll the more accurate the calculation.

8th is a boring math-hammer edition, you might as well not throw dice. ;)

It needs more spacial and intuitive aspects brought back.

 

I play Kill Team almost exclusively now, it is better than the main game due to the low numbers of rolls.

Well, that sounds like you/your opponent aren't playing the game, just lining up and shooting eachother.

[Ishagu]

It would be far less fun.

 

I don't want perfect averages anyway. I want to have the joy of hot dice and the heartbreak of rolling 4 1s during a clutch moment.

 

The game isn't math hammer, it's actually far less so than 7th edition was. It's a lot more mission, objective and positioning focused provided you make effort with terrain and play proper missions.

Edited August 28, 2019 by Ishagu

[Brother Casman]

What if we didn't use dice... What an odd question - it's literally one that would have never occurred to me, since the game is so intertwined with dice in my mind. My initial reaction is that you'd be playing some sort of RTS game on a computer, but even those have some hidden randomizers built in. I feel that would be an awfully sterile game, likely not much fun to me. Edited August 28, 2019 by Brother Casman
Adjusted word use.

[Marshal Loss]

I am proud to see that the only thing that can unanimously unite this community is our love of dice

[Marshal Rohr]

I am proud to see that the only thing that can unanimously unite this community is our love of dice

 

 

What?! I'd love a game with no dice. Just pushing models around going 'pew, pew'! 

[BitsHammer]

If we didn't use dice they'd probably use spinners or maybe dredel like tops with numbers on them.

 

40k has roots originally in RPG systems which require randomization as having a chance to fail makes the successes in the game better for the player. Likewise in wargaming having an idea how the dice should work can inform decisions but because they serve as a random number generator they can produce statistically less likely outcomes as well which creates those moments we tell our friends about, not the time our 5 Marines were exactly statistically average.

[Interrogator Stobz]

 

I calculated who would win and in what turn correctly for three out of six games I had at a tournament last year. The more dice you roll the more accurate the calculation.

8th is a boring math-hammer edition, you might as well not throw dice. ;)

It needs more spacial and intuitive aspects brought back.

 

I play Kill Team almost exclusively now, it is better than the main game due to the low numbers of rolls.

Well, that sounds like you/your opponent aren't playing the game, just lining up and shooting eachother.

You sound dismissive based on assumption; that wasn't the case at all, lots of manoeuvre and attempts at using cover, but in the end that only mattered a little bit.

Maybe a wider variety of units might have made it harder to calculate but there you go. Even if I don't have access to lists pre game it only takes a turn or so and you can see who's going to win.

There are a bunch if useful spreadsheets comparing kill percentages, used across a larger game they become more accurate.

The OPs question I think can be answered with- it depends on how good your probability math is.

 

ListHammer 8th is super boring to me because of that; that's why Kill Team is so great, way more dependant on spacial skill and the luck of the dice.

Because I too love dice!

[RandyB]

If we didn't use dice they'd probably use spinners or maybe dredel like tops with numbers on them.

 

40k has roots originally in RPG systems which require randomization as having a chance to fail makes the successes in the game better for the player. Likewise in wargaming having an idea how the dice should work can inform decisions but because they serve as a random number generator they can produce statistically less likely outcomes as well which creates those moments we tell our friends about, not the time our 5 Marines were exactly statistically average.

And RPGs have their roots in tabletop wargames, which used dice before RPGs were invented.

[Ishagu]

 

 

I calculated who would win and in what turn correctly for three out of six games I had at a tournament last year. The more dice you roll the more accurate the calculation.

8th is a boring math-hammer edition, you might as well not throw dice. ;)

It needs more spacial and intuitive aspects brought back.

 

I play Kill Team almost exclusively now, it is better than the main game due to the low numbers of rolls.

Well, that sounds like you/your opponent aren't playing the game, just lining up and shooting eachother.

You sound dismissive based on assumption; that wasn't the case at all, lots of manoeuvre and attempts at using cover, but in the end that only mattered a little bit.

Maybe a wider variety of units might have made it harder to calculate but there you go. Even if I don't have access to lists pre game it only takes a turn or so and you can see who's going to win.

There are a bunch if useful spreadsheets comparing kill percentages, used across a larger game they become more accurate.

The OPs question I think can be answered with- it depends on how good your probability math is.

 

ListHammer 8th is super boring to me because of that; that's why Kill Team is so great, way more dependant on spacial skill and the luck of the dice.

Because I too love dice!

I see some people saying this, but I honestly find it quite surprising. I've seen and have been involved in so many games that are only decided by the last few dice rolls.

 

Yes, some can be predictable but I find that if most of the games are so easily "calculated" the players are lacking something.

 

Equal-ish Skill

Equally-ish Matched lists

Proper Terrain

Proper Missions

 

We live in an age of 40k streaming. Watch the vids from the LVO/BAO. Loads of close games decided in the last turns.

Edited August 28, 2019 by Ishagu

[BitsHammer]

 

If we didn't use dice they'd probably use spinners or maybe dredel like tops with numbers on them.

 

40k has roots originally in RPG systems which require randomization as having a chance to fail makes the successes in the game better for the player. Likewise in wargaming having an idea how the dice should work can inform decisions but because they serve as a random number generator they can produce statistically less likely outcomes as well which creates those moments we tell our friends about, not the time our 5 Marines were exactly statistically average.

And RPGs have their roots in tabletop wargames, which used dice before RPGs were invented.

 

And dice have their root in gambling, so I guess we can blame Ancient Rome for everything. Again.

Edited August 28, 2019 by Fulkes

[Interrogator Stobz]

What you are saying is true Ishagu, some games are nice and unpredictable and go down to the wire; but so is what I said, many are not, too many for my taste.

 

The amount of info on how to win/counter/listhammer makes it more predictable as each player is more likely to use an assumed tactic therefore increasing the chance that calculations assumptions work out.

 

That is why I advocate for bringing back the spacial skill need, one example being premeasuring, another being templates (like them or not, they need more skill than throwing loads of dice) and increasing the damage anti tank weapons do.

 

Put more emphasis on player skill and less on net-skill and list-hammer.

Get the dice to matter again by reducing them where possible.

I love dice!

Edited August 28, 2019 by Interrogator Stobz

[Ishagu]

I'm all for less net lists.

 

One thing I don't appreciate is people copying lists just for increased win odds - although I understand it's what many want.

 

I do find that many such players become disenfranchised eventually. As we know the meta changes often, lists rise and fall, units get buffed or nerfed. An investment in an army might leave a bad taste if it's no longer performing, yet the performance was the reason you invested in the first place.

 

Interestingly I was recently watching 40k stat centre. They have all the facts and figures in incredible details.

They were talking about the list used by the current top ITC player - he naturally wins games and events all over the place. They can track other people using the same list - the people who copied or were inspired by it.

 

It turned out that in the hands of other people it only had a win rate of 48% in competitive play. This is a strong indicator of the importance of player skill as well as the list. And yes, some lists are easier to play. It doesn't take a genius to shoot you off the table with a 3++ Castellan surrounded by Guardsmen lol(I love my Castellan BTW, even post nerf).

 

For me I collect the factions I like the most in terms of lore, look, collecting, etc.

Edited August 28, 2019 by Ishagu

[Interrogator Stobz]

You do need to understand the netlist, the brilliant designers often have a deep, subtle and skillful view of the application that copies will not.

I'm talking about the majority of games against normal players.

We can agree there is variation in results; I also believe there is.

 

FYI, my statement is not black and white so you don't need to spend your day breaking it down, I appreciate you feel different. The old YMMV is relevant here.

[Beams]

 

 

I calculated who would win and in what turn correctly for three out of six games I had at a tournament last year. The more dice you roll the more accurate the calculation.

8th is a boring math-hammer edition, you might as well not throw dice. ;)

It needs more spacial and intuitive aspects brought back.

 

I play Kill Team almost exclusively now, it is better than the main game due to the low numbers of rolls.

Well, that sounds like you/your opponent aren't playing the game, just lining up and shooting eachother.

You sound dismissive based on assumption; that wasn't the case at all, lots of manoeuvre and attempts at using cover, but in the end that only mattered a little bit.

Maybe a wider variety of units might have made it harder to calculate but there you go. Even if I don't have access to lists pre game it only takes a turn or so and you can see who's going to win.

There are a bunch if useful spreadsheets comparing kill percentages, used across a larger game they become more accurate.

The OPs question I think can be answered with- it depends on how good your probability math is.

 

ListHammer 8th is super boring to me because of that; that's why Kill Team is so great, way more dependant on spacial skill and the luck of the dice.

Because I too love dice!

I mean, you were as accurate as a coin flip. I honestly think you just dislike 8th and either are looking for reasons to hate it, or your playing the wrong missions or without enough/right terrain. Your pick.

 

Most of my games are nail biters where movement matters a lot and we never know who's going to win; so mileage may vary.

Edited August 28, 2019 by Beams

[Interrogator Stobz]

Nah, I wasn't clear enough and you are reducing my point unnecessary.

I could predict three games and was right, the others had more variables and I didn't bother trying using math. But I did accurately predict the outcome of them.

So 6 from 6.

[Brother Tyler]

A tabletop miniature wargame without randomizing elements (dice in the case of WH40K) would harken back to Kriegsspiel (the Prussian/von Reisewitz game, not the 1970 Avalon Hill Kriegspiel) or something like a modern Eurogame. Much like Kriegsspiel, some sort of umpire would be needed unless there was some ironclad conflict resolution system. Neither alternative is very appealing to me. An umpire means you'd need a minimum of three players (and would then run a risk of bias/subjectivity/incompetence), whereas an ironclad conflict resolution system sounds either impractically complex or overly rigid (or both).

 

Statistics are fine for prediction and planning, but warfare is an amazingly chaotic affair. Sometimes the stronger side doesn't win. Sometimes that really accurate weapon is going to miss. Sometimes those boots are going to pull off an astounding success. Randomizers - dice, cards, spinners, whatever - are a fun way to represent the uncertainty of war on the tabletop.

 

Plus, dice are lots of fun.

 

As they say, the plan never survives first contact with the enemy.

[The Yncarne]

Played diceless Napoleonics in the early-mid 80s. Chance was simulated by card draws, weapon range, and a chart of shooting unit quality vs unit type and formation (skirmish, column, line infantry, horse artillery, etc). I quite liked it as it emphasized maneuvering and unit formation. It wouldn't translate to 40k, but it was no slower than 40k. Of course, it was largely large blocks of infantry, 45 - 100 men/corp and you'd usually get an infantry corp, some artillery, and cavalry in most games.

[Slave to Darkness]

 

I am proud to see that the only thing that can unanimously unite this community is our love of dice

 

 

What?! I'd love a game with no dice. Just pushing models around going 'pew, pew'! 

 

I still do that when Im bored