8th Ed. The BEST close combat units in all of Warhammer.

[Imrahil]

That wounds remaining column is something new I added in for the second matchup of our experiment (which was that razor close one between the White Lions and the Hammers). The reasoning was to keep track of fractions of wounds, which is something that is especially important in the case of big monsters with few but expensive wounds.

For instance let's say that the K'daai Destroyer was fighting in some fictional matchup. Let's assume that the opponent didn't do very well and only did 0.4 wounds to it mathematically. The Destroyer has 6 wounds minus 0.4 wound which equals 5.6 wounds. If I didn't keep track of decimal places, this would be rounded up to 6. Next round would be the same. All the damage would be lost to rounding errors (and the opposite can also occur).

The chart has definitely become significantly more complicated to accommodate this experiment, let me see if I can clarify it. The "Wounds remaining" column (second column from the left) represents the total number of wounds that the unit has at the start of that round of combat. So in round one, the Skullcrushers start with 15 wounds (5 models x 3 wounds per model). Since the Black Guard have the ASF special rule, they get to attack before the Skullcrushers do. In our matchup, the Black Guard were able to do 2.6 unsaved wounds to the Skullcrushers. You'll see the effect of this in the "Wounds remaining" column in the second round combat where the Skullcrushers are listed as having 12.4 wounds remaining (15 - 2.6 = 12.4).

View attachment 80724

So that is how the wound tracking from round to round works. However, still in the first round, after the Black Guard have inflicted 2.6 wounds to the Skullcrushers, the Skullcrushers still have to perform their attacks. For the purposes of figuring out how many attacks they have, I need to know how many models are alive to attack. In this case, I can't use fractions of a wound. So the 2.6 wounds the Black Guard inflicted is rounded up to 3 wounds. 3 wounds equals one dead Skullcrusher, so only 4 of them get to make their attacks, which is why you see "4 remaining) next to the their name. Technically I should have wrote it next to the stomp as well (that is my blunder ). So when ever you see "x remaining" next to an attack entry, that means that models have died during this combat phase before they could strike, resulting in few attacks generated. I usually only list it if the casualties changed the number of models that get to attack back. So if casualties are taken from a rank that wouldn't have gotten to attack anyways, I wouldn't list how many models are left, because all the active ranks (front rank plus supporting ranks) get their full attacks anyways.

Unfortunately this will get even more complicated in cases where models have multiple sets of attacks at different points in the close combat phase (for instance normal attacks which are struck at initiative order and a stomp/thunderstomp which is performed at the end of the round). The K'daai Destroyer for example has three sets of attacks, each at different points in the combat:

• blazing body (start of the round, even before ASF)
• regular attacks (at initiative 5)
• thunderstomp (at the end of the close combat round)

It could theoretically be killed at some point between these rounds, which would mean that it couldn't attempt the subsequent set(s) of attacks.


Let me know if my long-winded explanation has cleared things up (sorry for the poor penmanship, it's hard for me to write on the image using the mouse) . I really want the chart to be easily readable for everyone. It's obviously hard for me to judge it, because in the processing of designing it I know how precisely how it works, but not necessarily how it comes off to others reading it. It is very much a work in progress and has been greatly expanded for this experiment compared to the plain old one I designed for personal use. I could very easily hide the "Wounds remaining" column when posting the charts on this thread (and even replace it with a models remaining column), but then every once in a while a wound or model would appear to magically disappear due to rounding that is occurring behind the scenes. So it is a case of making things look simpler, but not displaying all the information, or having it a bit more complicated, but everyone gets to see exactly what I see. If you have any suggestions for improving the chart for clarity, let me know. Your feedback is appreciated.

There are a few more complicated things that I have to account for in some of the future matchups. I'll try to explain beforehand how incorporated those special rules into the calculations. I've never tackled these issues before, but I think I have an accurate solution for them. Don't hesitate to ask for clarification or provide feedback when we come to them!

The sheet is particularly clear, as I figured out the wounds sequence as you described
but I am not accustomed with the number of wounds per model for all of these units.

With the ASF the sheet makes perfect sense.
If it is not to much work you could list some of the rules per unit when you post the combat results. This way we(the unexperienced 'Knights of Eight') know what rules the unit benefit from.

Thanks for all your work

Grrr, Imrahil

 

[Lizards of Renown]

But I could hide some if it means that the outputted chart is easier for everyone to read.

No, I think what you have on there is pretty good.

Did my earlier (long winded) explanation help clarify things?

Yes. I also just had to take a look at each number and realize that what you've done is just turned each stat match-up (WS vs WS, S vs T, etc.) into a percentage expressed as a decimal. The calculations obviously take a percentage of the original attack figure, the uses this new integer for the next calculation, etc. etc.

Pretty smart actually. I quite like working out excel formulas. Can you PM me the exact commands you used?

That is who I was thinking of as well! I'm surprised to see you pick them as weren't you originally the one who suggested their inclusion in our contest (above Witch Elves and Executioners)?

You're right, I did. It just didn't make sense to me that Dark Elves are one of the top-tier armies, yet they weren't even registering on the best CC unit scale.

Then that first battle with the Black Guard ended my question on it. I guess it must be the overall composition of the Dark Elf army.

I would have said the Witch Elves due to zero armour save, but I actually think with the AHW and Frenzy they'll do better than the Black Guard. They will still be one of the lowest scoring, but they'll still do better than the Black Guard.

I really feel like this math-hammer will prove the best units have to have durability otherwise they just get smashed up before they can do any damage.

 

[Lord Agragax of Lunaxoatl]

For me, the Elves (Both High and Dark) represent OP forces and so I instinctively resent them and even (to a degree) people who play them. I don't like "games" where people are not interested in enjoying the fight or who just want to have the most OP forces just to win.

Join the club my friend, I have recorded several grudges against such players in my Dammaz Kron!

(I play High Elves it is true but I only play them because I liked their blue heraldry and their noble air, and my army is built simply from what I like the look of, and I also play middle and bottom-tier armies too).

As for my favourites, to win First Place, as much as I can’t stand them, I’m also going to have to vote Skullcrushers. What were GW thinking when writing the ridiculously strong rules for those things? Did they even bother to take playtesting into account?

To win Last Place, I actually nominate the Witch Elves, as aside from any 6s they get when rolling to hit they will be wounding pretty much everything else on that list on 5s or worse, and their feeble Strength 3 means anything that has an armour save will be comfortably weathering the storm.

 

[Imrahil]

To win Last Place, I actually nominate the Witch Elves, as aside from any 6s they get when rolling to hit they will be wounding pretty much everything else on that list on 5s or worse, and their feeble Strength 3 means anything that has an armour save will be comfortably weathering the storm.

That does not sound good for my bet then...

Grrr, Imrahil

 

[Imrahil]

No, currently it does not. What you guys see, is what I see. Obviously there are formulas in the cells themselves, but none of the cells (rows or columns) are hidden. But I could hide some if it means that the outputted chart is easier for everyone to read.

It really is up to you guys. It's hard for me to judge because it is something akin to proof reading your own essay.

Did my earlier (long winded) explanation help clarify things?



That is who I was thinking of as well! I'm surprised to see you pick them as weren't you originally the one who suggested their inclusion in our contest (above Witch Elves and Executioners)?


So far we have:

Betting favourites to win first place:

• Skullcrushers: @NIGHTBRINGER
• Warriors of Chaos: @Lizards of Renown
• Witch Elves: @Imrahil

Betting favourites to come in last place:

• Black Guard: @Lizards of Renown , @NIGHTBRINGER

For last place I want to nominate Demigryph Knights

Grrr, Imrahil

 

[NIGHTBRINGER]

Matchup time! This time around we have Australia's champion, the Arachnarok Spider vs. the Empire's Demigryph Knights.

Spoiler: How calculations were performed.

Before we begin, the Arachnarok Spider has two special rules that greatly complicate the calculations. I will try to explain how the calculations were performed. The two rules I speak of are the Spider's Poisoned Attacks and its Venom Surge.

The Spider has 8 total attacks (+crew attacks). One of those attacks is nominated as the Venom Surge attack, which has the Multiple Wounds (D6) special rule. So I split the Spider's attacks across two excel lines, one containing the 7 regular attacks and one containing the 1 Venom Surge attack. Simple enough so far... but wait there is more! Both the regular attacks and the Venom Surge attack has a chance to roll a 6 for a Poisoned hits or roll a 4 or a 5 for a non-poisoned hits. So those two excel lines [1 for regular attacks and 1 for Venom Surge attack] each have to be further split in two, accounting for hits and poisoned hits. So the Spider's attacks (just the Spider, the crew have their own set of attacks) are accounted for across the following four lines on the spreadsheet:

• Arachnarok Spider regular attacks
• Arachnarok Spider poisoned attacks
• Arachnarok Spider Venom Surge attack
• Arachnarok Spider Vemon Surge poisoned attack

So for the 7 regular attacks, we have two lines, accounting for poison and non poison. You'll notice that each line has a 7 under the attacks column. The reason for this is because it is accounted for under the "To Hit" column. The Spider and the Demigryph Knights each have WS4, so the Spider is hitting on 4's, 5's and 6's. The rolls of 4's and 5's represent non-poisoned hits, while the rolls of 6's represent poisoned hits.

The odds of rolling a 4 or a 5 is 1/3 = 0.33 (which is the number we see in the To Hit column for the "Arachnarok Spider regular attacks")
The odds of rolling a 6 is 1/6 = 0.17 (which is the number we see in the To Hit column for the Arachnarok Spider poisoned attacks)

So even though the Spider looks to have twice as many attacks, it is simply because the hit probability of 50% is spread across two lines, 17% + 33% = 50%.

The same procedure is applied to the Venom Surge attack and the Venom Surge poisoned attack, but this time with only 1 attack instead of 7 (as described previously).


Hopefully this is making sense. I have only one more thing to explain, namely, how to deal with Multiple Wounds (D6). You'll notice in the table that there is a Multiple Wounds column, and under it I have calculated the D6 wounds to be 2.5 (and not the 3.5 that we would normally expect as an average of D6). The reason for this comes down to how the Multiple Wounds special rule works. On page 45 of the BRB it states in reference to Multiple Wound models and Multiple Wound weapons that: "remember that each model cannot suffer more wounds than is on its profile). In this case, we have Demigryph Knights, who have 3 wounds on their profile. Therefore, if when rolling for our Multiple Wounds (D6) we roll a 4, 5 or a 6, these only count as "3".

So when rolling Multiple Wounds (D6) we can roll either a

• 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 or 6
• which in game terms means 1, 2, 3, 4➝3, 5➝3 or 6➝3.
• so we are left with the following possible outcomes 1,2,3,3,3,3
• when we average these numbers we get (1+2+3+3+3+3)/6 = 2.5

And that is why you'll find the value of 2.5 under the Spider's Venom Surge Multiple Wounds table column.


Hopefully that made sense. Please let me know if any of this is even remotely useful. It is exceedingly boring to type out (and probably not much more interesting to read), so if nobody is reading it, I can save myself a bunch of time when I tackle the Soul Grinder and the Hell Pit in the future... each of which have different rules to account for.

With that out of the way, now let's move onto the good stuff...

Key rules in play:

• Demigryph Knights: Armour Piercing (Demi only)
• Arachnarok: Poisoned Attacks (Spider only), Vemon Surge, Stubborn

Both units had a great deal of difficulty wounding each other. The mighty 1+ armour save protecting the Demigryph Knights and the toughness of 6 protecting the Archnarok. In the end, the Demigryphs were able to wound just enough to swing combat their way. This is where the rules of our tournament hurt the Spider. For break tests, we assume that units roll 7 (which is the most probable roll). The Arachnarok only has leadership 6, so anytime it loses a round of combat it will break according to our rules (the Chaos Trolls suffer from this same fate as well). Of course, even if we were to assume that the Arachnarok made everyone of its break tests (which is extremely unlikely in an actual game without the general's leadership bubble) it would still be wiped out by the Demigryph Knights, only instead of 1 round, it would on average last 4 rounds.


As per usual, here is the updated table:




Most importantly... Thoughts? Concerns? Discussion!!

 

[Lizards of Renown]

Matchup time! This time around we have Australia's champion, the Arachnarok Spider vs. the Empire's Demigryph Knights.

Spoiler: How calculations were performed.

Before we begin, the Arachnarok Spider has two special rules that greatly complicate the calculations. I will try to explain how the calculations were performed. The two rules I speak of are the Spider's Poisoned Attacks and its Venom Surge.

The Spider has 8 total attacks (+crew attacks). One of those attacks is nominated as the Venom Surge attack, which has the Multiple Wounds (D6) special rule. So I split the Spider's attacks across two excel lines, one containing the 7 regular attacks and one containing the 1 Venom Surge attack. Simple enough so far... but wait there is more! Both the regular attacks and the Venom Surge attack has a chance to roll a 6 for a Poisoned hits or roll a 4 or a 5 for a non-poisoned hits. So those two excel lines [1 for regular attacks and 1 for Venom Surge attack] each have to be further split in two, accounting for hits and poisoned hits. So the Spider's attacks (just the Spider, the crew have their own set of attacks) are accounted for across the following four lines on the spreadsheet:

• Arachnarok Spider regular attacks
• Arachnarok Spider poisoned attacks
• Arachnarok Spider Venom Surge attack
• Arachnarok Spider Vemon Surge poisoned attack

So for the 7 regular attacks, we have two lines, accounting for poison and non poison. You'll notice that each line has a 7 under the attacks column. The reason for this is because it is accounted for under the "To Hit" column. The Spider and the Demigryph Knights each have WS4, so the Spider is hitting on 4's, 5's and 6's. The rolls of 4's and 5's represent non-poisoned hits, while the rolls of 6's represent poisoned hits.

The odds of rolling a 4 or a 5 is 1/3 = 0.33 (which is the number we see in the To Hit column for the "Arachnarok Spider regular attacks")
The odds of rolling a 6 is 1/6 = 0.17 (which is the number we see in the To Hit column for the Arachnarok Spider poisoned attacks)

So even though the Spider looks to have twice as many attacks, it is simply because the hit probability of 50% is spread across two lines, 17% + 33% = 50%.

The same procedure is applied to the Venom Surge attack and the Venom Surge poisoned attack, but this time with only 1 attack instead of 7 (as described previously).


Hopefully this is making sense. I have only one more thing to explain, namely, how to deal with Multiple Wounds (D6). You'll notice in the table that there is a Multiple Wounds column, and under it I have calculated the D6 wounds to be 2.5 (and not the 3.5 that we would normally expect as an average of D6). The reason for this comes down to how the Multiple Wounds special rule works. On page 45 of the BRB it states in reference to Multiple Wound models and Multiple Wound weapons that: "remember that each model cannot suffer more wounds than is on its profile). In this case, we have Demigryph Knights, who have 3 wounds on their profile. Therefore, if when rolling for our Multiple Wounds (D6) we roll a 4, 5 or a 6, these only count as "3".

So when rolling Multiple Wounds (D6) we can roll either a

• 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 or 6
• which in game terms means 1, 2, 3, 4➝3, 5➝3 or 6➝3.
• so we are left with the following possible outcomes 1,2,3,3,3,3
• when we average these numbers we get (1+2+3+3+3+3)/6 = 2.5

And that is why you'll find the value of 2.5 under the Spider's Venom Surge Multiple Wounds table column.


Hopefully that made sense. Please let me know if any of this is even remotely useful. It is exceedingly boring to type out (and probably not much more interesting to read), so if nobody is reading it, I can save myself a bunch of time when I tackle the Soul Grinder and the Hell Pit in the future... each of which have different rules to account for.

With that out of the way, now let's move onto the good stuff...

Key rules in play:

• Demigryph Knights: Armour Piercing (Demi only)
• Arachnarok: Poisoned Attacks (Spider only), Vemon Surge, Stubborn

View attachment 80750

Both units had a great deal of difficulty wounding each other. The mighty 1+ armour save protecting the Demigryph Knights and the toughness of 6 protecting the Archnarok. In the end, the Demigryphs were able to wound just enough to swing combat their way. This is where the rules of our tournament hurt the Spider. For break tests, we assume that units roll 7 (which is the most probable roll). The Arachnarok only has leadership 6, so anytime it loses a round of combat it will break according to our rules (the Chaos Trolls suffer from this same fate as well). Of course, even if we were to assume that the Arachnarok made everyone of its break tests (which is extremely unlikely in an actual game without the general's leadership bubble) it would still be wiped out by the Demigryph Knights, only instead of 1 round, it would on average last 4 rounds.


As per usual, here is the updated table:

View attachment 80751


Most importantly... Thoughts? Concerns? Discussion!!

Wow.

First off, may I just say again that I appreciate you doing all the mind-numbing calculations. I think you make good sense on what you worked out.

Second, I did not see that coming. I thought the Demi-Gryph Knights were one of the contenders for last place. This example truly shows that power of the 1+ save. Absolutely brutal!

Makes me feel better about going up against the Arachnarok to be honest!

 

[NIGHTBRINGER]

With the ASF the sheet makes perfect sense.

Keep in mind, that even without ASF, the same layout will be used. Unless models are striking at the same time, we can arrive at a situation where one unit inflicts casualties sufficient enough reduce the incoming counterattack.

If it is not to much work you could list some of the rules per unit when you post the combat results. This way we(the unexperienced 'Knights of Eight') know what rules the unit benefit from.

I have included them in the Arachnarok vs. Demigryph matchup.

Can you PM me the exact commands you used?

In this setup I actually don't use any fancy functions at all. It is a straight multiplication across the probabilities and then a simple sum of the individual unsaved wounds to arrive at the total unsaved wounds.

To arrive at the Combat Result, I simply add together one unit's Total Unsaved Wounds + Static Combat Res and then subtract from it the enemy unit's Total Unsaved Wounds + Static Combat Res.

I really feel like this math-hammer will prove the best units have to have durability otherwise they just get smashed up before they can do any damage.

That is my belief as well.

For last place I want to nominate Demigryph Knights

Grrr, Imrahil

A brave choice. I saw you post this just as I was finishing my Demigryph vs. Arachnarok post! Time will tell though. Individual matchup results can be highly skewed and may not give a good picture of how things will turn out in the end (The K'daai Destroyer matchup from earlier is a perfect example of this).



So far we have:

Betting favourites to win first place:

• Skullcrushers: @NIGHTBRINGER , @Lord Agragax of Lunaxoatl
• Warriors of Chaos: @Lizards of Renown
• Witch Elves: @Imrahil

Betting favourites to come in last place:

• Black Guard: @Lizards of Renown , @NIGHTBRINGER
• Witch Elves: @Lord Agragax of Lunaxoatl
• Demigryph Knights: @Imrahil

 

[NIGHTBRINGER]

Second, I did not see that coming. I thought the Demi-Gryph Knights were one of the contenders for last place.

Demigryph Knights are essentially Skullcrushers lite. Skullcrushers are obviously a fair bit stronger, but they also cost a fair bit more.

Makes me feel better about going up against the Arachnarok to be honest!

It's still a very good unit. It barely lost combat against Demigryph Knights (it only lost by 0.8 wounds)! I'm curious to see how it will perform against some of the softer targets on our list.


Remember that all of these competitors are the best of the best, so the Arachnarok can still do well in real game scenarios against regular units. It does show though that the the Arachnarok really needs the general around.

 

[Lizards of Renown]

Demigryph Knights are essentially Skullcrushers lite. Skullcrushers are obviously a fair bit stronger, but they also cost a fair bit more.

Right. I'm not that familiar with Empire and just read their stats. They actually turn out pretty good! It's 1+ save, T4 and the 3 S5 AP attacks from the demigryph and 1 S4 from the rider.

It's still a very good unit. It barely lost combat against Demigryph Knights (it only lost by 0.8 wounds)! I'm curious to see how it will perform against some of the softer targets on our list.

Remember that all of these competitors are the best of the best, so the Arachnarok can still do well in real game scenarios against regular units. It does show though that the the Arachnarok really needs the general around.

It's true. Just like the Stegadon really. Don't leave it in combat alone. Or outside of the general's bubble.

 

[NIGHTBRINGER]

Up next... Chaos Warriors vs. Mournfang Cavalry.





Running the Mournfang 5 wide results in them sustaining 6.2 unsaved wounds (before they get to strike) killing two Mounfang models. In the previous scenario, where they were run 3 wide, they sustained only 5.3 wounds, which is rounded down to 5. Meaning that instead of losing two models, they lose 1 model, and the second one is sitting on a single wound. This increases their counterattack slightly, but more importantly it swings the combat from them losing combat by 1 (and breaking) to a drawn combat.



So the Chaos Warriors squeak out a massive victory. The contest is a lot closer than it appears on paper and can swing pretty wildly. I would like to add a caveat to the results. In game terms, the contest would come down to who gets the charge. If the Mournfang get the charge (especially if running 5 wide), the impact hits alone will average 5.6 unsaved wounds (before the Chaos Warriors get to strike) and swings the contest in favour of the Mournfang. However, as per the contest rules, the Warriors of Chaos take the victory.

CORRECTION - The Mournfang Cavalry's ability to parry save even while mounted was not originally factored into the calculations. The correction has been made below, as well as a small error on the Chaos Warriors number of attacks in one round.

The previous Massive Victory by the Chaos Warriors has been downgraded to a hard fought last man standing Chaos Warrior Victory.

Obviously, every single update table (up until the fourth round of the tournament, which is when I noticed the omission) will have the incorrect result for this matchup.






Most importantly... Thoughts? Concerns? Discussion!!

 

[Lizards of Renown]

Up next... Chaos Warriors vs. Mournfang Cavalry.

View attachment 80796

Spoiler: In case you were wondering why the Mournfang in the previous table were not 5 wide...

View attachment 80797

Running the Mournfang 5 wide results in them sustaining 6.2 unsaved wounds (before they get to strike) killing two Mounfang models. In the previous scenario, where they were run 3 wide, they sustained only 5.3 wounds, which is rounded down to 5. Meaning that instead of losing two models, they lose 1 model, and the second one is sitting on a single wound. This increases their counterattack slightly, but more importantly it swings the combat from them losing combat by 1 (and breaking) to a drawn combat.

So the Chaos Warriors squeak out a massive victory. The contest is a lot closer than it appears on paper and can swing pretty wildly. I would like to add a caveat to the results. In game terms, the contest would come down to who gets the charge. If the Mournfang get the charge (especially if running 5 wide), the impact hits alone will average 5.6 unsaved wounds (before the Chaos Warriors get to strike) and swings the contest in favour of the Mournfang. However, as per the contest rules, the Warriors of Chaos take the victory.

View attachment 80798


Most importantly... Thoughts? Concerns? Discussion!!

To be honest, I was really hoping that the Mournfang Cavalry would win here but there is a reason why I put WoC as my bet for the win. Ridiculous.

Like you say, the Mournfang charge is most important. In a 3-wide unit, that's 3D3 S5 impact hits. Makes a big difference and I genuinely would think that if a WoC unit got the charge, then unless I was pretty lucky I would lose for sure (or get some kind of flanking attack).

The WoC army list is super depressing when viewed in isolation like this. Gaaagh!

[Dark chuckling echoes from Nightbringer as he strokes the case containing his WoC army]

Anyways, more to the point is that this proves the value of Math-hammer in that you need to work out how to make the fight uneven to ensure you win. A straight-up, points to points fight you will lose, so this is an occasion where your general'ing needs to have an actual strategy on what you're going to do and then employ the units to best do this.

It's funny as I've seen it in my own lists before and I've seen it in some of the lists posted in the army lists sub-forum: sometimes people make an army list based on what they think is best.

But even on an all-comers competition list, you still have to think of what your strategies are gonna be when faced with high toughness enemies, or fast, etc. If you want to win, you'll need to have some solid "plays" (to quote an American Football term) for the different enemies. One-trick-wonders are only good in one-on-one fights, I think.

One of my friends plays Dark Elves which is a definite top tier army and keeps losing. He even knows why but doesn't want to change! He likes certain units and always includes them which my other friends know about. He also doesn't like getting "complicated" about strategies and mainly tries to get into hand-to-hand. [Shrugs] I have tried to help him with it, but he's a bit stubborn about that. Also results in him not being interested in playing most of the time which is a shame.

 

[NIGHTBRINGER]

I was really hoping that the Mournfang Cavalry would win

The WoC army list is super depressing when viewed in isolation like this. Gaaagh!

True, but if I had to pick on side or the other, played on a full sized board (but with no other units on the field), for 1 million dollars, I'd go with the Mournfang Cavalry. If we even out player skill and luck, the odds are significantly in their favour to get the charge and win the contest. The Chaos Warriors got a little lucky with the parameters of our experiment.

Also consider, that pure close combat prowess does not tell the entire story. Mournfang are a fast moving unit, so that has to be factored into their points cost. The Chaos Warriors are slow in comparison, so all of their points cost goes directly into their close combat ability. Each has it's strengths and weaknesses. Unfortunately, the Ogres' movement speed, impact hits and fear are not considered in our math-hammer matchup. That contextual information is extremely important. Lastly, if the Mournfang were in their general's leadership bubble, they would have likely not broken from combat and the contest would have become a real bloodbath!

Additionally, the matchup, even in with our contest rules, was much closer than it appeared to be.

 

[Lizards of Renown]

True, but if I had to pick on side or the other, played on a full sized board (but with no other units on the field), for 1 million dollars, I'd go with the Mournfang Cavalry. If we even out player skill and luck, the odds are significantly in their favour to get the charge and win the contest. The Chaos Warriors got a little lucky with the parameters of our experiment.

Also consider, that pure close combat prowess does not tell the entire story. Mournfang are a fast moving unit, so that has to be factored into their points cost. The Chaos Warriors are slow in comparison, so all of their points cost goes directly into their close combat ability. Each has it's strengths and weaknesses. Unfortunately, the Ogres' movement speed, impact hits and fear are not considered in our math-hammer matchup. That contextual information is extremely important. Lastly, if the Mournfang were in their general's leadership bubble, they would have likely not broken from combat and the contest would have become a real bloodbath!

Additionally, the matchup, even in with our contest rules, was much closer than it appeared to be.

All true.

But you are having a dark chuckle about your WoC aren't you?

 

[NIGHTBRINGER]

All true.

But you are having a dark chuckle about your WoC aren't you?

Maybe a little. The Chaos Trolls won their matchup too! The Skullcrushers were expected, but these other two wins are a nice little bonus for the WoC.


I must admit though, in my heart of hearts, I'm cheering for the K'daai Destroyer. The Dark Stunties need that one, while the WoC are already in the top tier. Don't be fooled by the K'daai's opening performance... it has a couple of hard-counter matchups (Beasts of Nurgle, Witch Elves) and a close matchup (Skullcrushers), but I think everyone else is going to regret tangling with it! I'm still betting that it finishes in the top 3... but who knows, matchups have already surprised me, so time will tell.

 

[Lizards of Renown]

Maybe a little. The Chaos Trolls won their matchup too! The Skullcrushers were expected, but these other two wins are a nice little bonus for the WoC.


I must admit though, in my heart of hearts, I'm cheering for the K'daai Destroyer. The Dark Stunties need that one, while the WoC are already in the top tier. Don't be fooled by the K'daai's opening performance... it has a couple of hard-counter matchups (Beasts of Nurgle, Witch Elves) and a close matchup (Skullcrushers), but I think everyone else is going to regret tangling with it! I'm still betting that it finishes in the top 3... but who knows, matchups have already surprised me, so time will tell.

I can tell you definitively that the K'Daai Destroyer will definitely be in the top 5.

I don't think I'd go so far as to say "lets bet who the top five are" but mark my words, it will be there. Burning body, stomp and the regular attacks, plus it's decent armour save means I can already guess-timate the math-hammer and it's pretty good.

 

[NIGHTBRINGER]

I can tell you definitively that the K'Daai Destroyer will definitely be in the top 5.

I don't think I'd go so far as to say "lets bet who the top five are" but mark my words, it will be there. Burning body, stomp and the regular attacks, plus it's decent armour save means I can already guess-timate the math-hammer and it's pretty good.

I'd say top 3.

By armour save, I assume you mean its 4+ ward save. The Destroyer does not have an armour save. Either way, your point is valid, the Destroyer is very well defended.

 

[NIGHTBRINGER]

Show time! In this matchup we pit the Witch Elves against the Hell Pit Abomination.

Key rules in play:

• Witch Elves: ASF, Frenzy, Murderous Prowess, Poisoned Attacks
• Hell Pit Abomination: Regeneration (4+), Special Close Combat Attacks, Stubborn

Spoiler: Key points on how the calculations were performed

In this matchup, the Hell Pit posed an interesting problem for the calculations. The Hell Pit has the rule "Special Close Combat Attacks", which means that it rolls a D6 to determine which of its special attacks it performs in that round of combat (like a giant does)...

• On a roll of 1-2: Feed
• On a roll of 3-4: Flailing Flesh
• On a roll of 5-6: Avalanche of Flesh

So each set of attacks has a 1/3 chance of being rolled for. The best way I thought to tackle this statistically is to have the Hell Pit do all three sets of attacks each round, but reduce the damage (unsaved wounds) it does to 1/3 of normal. This will provide us with the average damage that the Hell Pit would do. To facilitate this, you will notice that a new column (fourth from the left), called "Hell Pit Special Attacks Probability", was added to the table.


Important note: When the Hell Pit dies and provided that the Hell Pit did not lose any of its wounds to flaming attacks, it's "Too Horrible To Die" special rule takes effect. A dice is rolled:

• 1-3: Nothing else happens
• 4-5: D3 Rat Swarms are placed within 3" of where the Hell Pit was slain and at least 1" away from enemy units
• 6: The Hell Pit comes back alive with D6 wounds. It is placed within 3" of where it was slain and at least 1" away from enemy units

There is no way that I could think of to accurately and fairly incorporate this rule. As a result, the rule was simply ignored. So just keep in mind, that in this matchup there is a 1/6th chance that the Hell Pit could come back alive with D6 wounds!

Updated table...



And with that, the only two units that have yet to fight are the Savage Orc Big'Uns and the Soul Grinder. They'll be next up.

Most importantly... Thoughts? Concerns? Discussion!!

 

[Imrahil]

Show time! In this matchup we pit the Witch Elves against the Hell Pit Abomination.

Key rules in play:

• Witch Elves: ASF, Frenzy, Murderous Prowess, Poisoned Attacks
• Hell Pit Abomination: Regeneration (4+), Special Close Combat Attacks, Stubborn

Spoiler: Key points on how the calculations were performed

In this matchup, the Hell Pit posed an interesting problem for the calculations. The Hell Pit has the rule "Special Close Combat Attacks", which means that it rolls a D6 to determine which of its special attacks it performs in that round of combat (like a giant does)...

• On a roll of 1-2: Feed
• On a roll of 3-4: Flailing Flesh
• On a roll of 5-6: Avalanche of Flesh

So each set of attacks has a 1/3 chance of being rolled for. The best way I thought to tackle this statistically is to have the Hell Pit do all three sets of attacks each round, but reduce the damage (unsaved wounds) it does to 1/3 of normal. This will provide us with the average damage that the Hell Pit would do. To facilitate this, you will notice that a new column (fourth from the left), called "Hell Pit Special Attacks Probability", was added to the table.


Important note: When the Hell Pit dies and provided that the Hell Pit did not lose any of its wounds to flaming attacks, it's "Too Horrible To Die" special rule takes effect. A dice is rolled:

• 1-3: Nothing else happens
• 4-5: D3 Rat Swarms are placed within 3" of where the Hell Pit was slain and at least 1" away from enemy units
• 6: The Hell Pit comes back alive with D6 wounds. It is placed within 3" of where it was slain and at least 1" away from enemy units

There is no way that I could think of to accurately and fairly incorporate this rule. As a result, the rule was simply ignored. So just keep in mind, that in this matchup there is a 1/6th chance that the Hell Pit could come back alive with D6 wounds!

View attachment 80840

Updated table...

View attachment 80841

And with that, the only two units that have yet to fight are the Savage Orc Big'Uns and the Soul Grinder. They'll be next up.

Most importantly... Thoughts? Concerns? Discussion!!

That's a good start for my picked unit
I like the theory behind your statistical choices, well done. I know it is boring to write but I find it exciting to read

As I noticed just now the unit points per battle is evened out somewhat, but the points value between battles differs.
How are you planning to do the battle between, for instance, the K'daai Destroyer and the Hell Pit Abomination?

Grrr, Imrahil

 

[Imrahil]

I have included them in the Arachnarok vs. Demigryph matchup.

A great improvement if I may see so

Grrr, Imrahil