The Miniatures War College

Indefiante Sabatical

2007-01-04T21:40:00.000-07:00

Yes, for those still following this blog, it's been kinda stale. I guess you could say I've been on sabbatical. And for the time being the sabbatical will be indefinite. The podcast came to an end, my web postings came to an end, and I haven't rolled a d20 since last spring. The last booster I bought was War Drums.

Why the break? If I told you all of the reasons it would look like I was trying to write a fake letter to Dear Abby (and that's not an exaggeration either). The happiest of the reasons is also the most lasting reason I have no time: the birth of my second son Caleb. So once he grows a little more perhaps I will be able to game some more, until then it is Diapers and Desitin for my free time.

Podcast 4 - Angelfire Graduation, Underdark Dean's List

2005-11-10T15:40:00.000-07:00

Podcast 4 has been released: [MP3].

Reviewing the Previews reviews the Hellspike Prison Map.

The feature segment is the War College Graduation for Angelfire. Listen to see who I graduate cum Laude, Magna cum Laude, and Suma cum Laude. A few Best of and Most Likely to awards are given.

I finish off listing the 7 figures from Underdark I am placing on the Dean's List. These are figures I see with the most potential to graduate with honors.

A9 Search Results bode well for DDMG

2005-11-01T12:33:00.000-07:00

I did a bit of marketing research on the internet and disovered that the top two searches for "booster pack" on A9 are for D&D Miniatures produts! Abberations and Angelfire to be specific. Beating out Po-ke-oh, YuGiMon, Magic, and all of the Clix games. Images didn't fare too well, #1 was a UGO game but two and three are star wars minis!

So why would I have found this out? The truth is I was attempting to see if I could mine out and scoop the real name of Set 10, what I will tenatively code name "Battle Cry". I though that since July Releases such as Secrets of Xen'drik have surfaces that we may be seeing some other July products. No such luck yet.

Podcast 3 - Underdark Spoilers Statistical Review

2005-10-27T10:05:00.000-06:00

Podcast 3 has been releasd: [MP3]. I pontificate on the statistical findings from the Underdark spoiners. Go Uncommon Dwarves!

Underdark Spoilers (no, for real this time!)

2005-10-25T10:08:00.000-06:00

Spoilers are surfacing again on the Wizards of the Coast message boards and the MaxMinis Message Boards. As of this writing I count 48 of 60 revealed, with mostly rares remaining. Hence, I will not be posting my podcast this week (it isn't done anyway).

Thursday I will do the statistical run-down of whatever spoilers we have at that point. No Eyes of Gruumnsh yet, but it isn't a set full of ophidians either.

Next Tuesday I will be doing the War College Graduation/Dean's List podcast , and then in three weeks I will post the podcast I was anticipating to post today. The Graduation podcast will require a whole lot less post production than the Interview podcast I was going to post today, in three weeks you will see what I mean.

UNDERDARK SPOILERS

2005-10-18T21:49:00.000-06:00

So, when do you think we'll get the Underdark spoilers?

Sorry, I saw this. Even though it had a DC of 13 I managed to roll a 1.

Between an anniversary trip to Santa Fe, the impending arrival of the afformentioned spoilers, and an extra special interview I have lined up if the spoilers don't arrive by next tuesday, I have nothing to post this week.

Podcast 2: Fair Woodland Creatures of the Underdark

2005-10-11T09:21:00.000-06:00

Episode 2 of the Miniatures War College is up. This podcast changes the name for hopefully the last time. This episode covers Underdark Previews #5 and #6 and the October Previews. The second segment discusses tools for calculating Line of Sight.

Please note that all of the links to this weblog and podcast have changed to /warcollege/ (college as in a place of learning) from /warcollage/ (collage as in an assembly of various fragments). Auto-redirects should be in place to update most feed reders, but some may need to be changed by hand. Also the feedburner link has changed as well.

My Odeo Channel (odeo/70d30d957e6009a1)

Curses! Numbers Again!

2005-10-02T18:34:00.000-06:00

Another card to leak out of GenCon 2005 was Elminster of Shadowdale. Being the first of the new Epic figures there are two versions of the card. The most interesting spell IMHO is the 7th Level Spell Mystra's Curse (sight; roll twice for each of target creature's rolls and take the lower result, DC 19). This is another effect which is like Conceal where the number you need to roll determines the effectiveness of the effect. One simple notion is to think of the Curse effect as "do it, then do it again." The problem with that notion is that the probability of not rolling a 1 twice in a row is far different from rolling a 20 twice in a row. The truth is you have better odds rolling a 1 in one of two rolls as you do of rolling a 15 or better twice in a row.

To display the odds, I will use a plot showing the cumulative probability of success. Well not quite, I believe I should flip it from right to left, but then the numbers are backwards. Since I don't do this professionally then such errors are commemorate with my pay scale. The left axis shows the odds of making the rolls you need, while the bottom shows the roll you need to make or beat. It is important to note that the odds are not that of making that precise role, but that roll or better.

An image may be worth a thousand words, but a chart is worth 10x magnification. This chart summarizes the data and adds a new data point, "like rolling." It equates the odds to what you would need to roll on a d20.0 (a special d20 that rolls to the tenths place). When the odds get really ridiculous, I replace it with a 20+x notation, where it is like rolling a 20 and then needing to roll x. As you can see from the data, the curse can be well worth it's cost in points, too bad the Epic version of the card is missing this spell.

Roll	Normal	Cursed	Like
1	100.00%	100.00%	1.0
2	95.00%	90.25%	3.0
3	90.00%	81.00%	4.8
4	85.00%	72.25%	6.6
5	80.00%	64.00%	8.2
6	75.00%	56.25%	9.8
7	70.00%	49.00%	11.2
8	65.00%	42.25%	12.6
9	60.00%	36.00%	13.8
10	55.00%	30.25%	15.0
11	50.00%	25.00%	16.0
12	45.00%	20.25%	17.0
13	40.00%	16.00%	17.8
14	35.00%	12.25%	18.6
15	30.00%	9.00%	19.2
16	25.00%	6.25%	19.8
17	20.00%	4.00%	20 + 5
18	15.00%	2.25%	20 + 11
19	10.00%	1.00%	20 + 17
20	5.00%	0.25%	20 + 20

Podcast!

2005-09-26T21:28:00.000-06:00

Treading new ground in the D&D Miniatures fan site frontier I present to you the inaugural podcast of the Miniatures War Collage!

For those of you interested, I also have a new podcast friendly feed.

One of these days I will adjust my template to add the link, but not today.

Enslaved to Numbers

2005-09-19T16:07:00.000-06:00

The stats for the Balor have finally come out last Friday. The Balor has one of the more game-changing Commander Effects in the game: Ensalve (Each enemy that fails a morale save must immediately make another morale save; if the second save fails, that enemy counts as eliminated for victory points, is no longer routing, and is a member of your warband for the rest of the skirmish).

Just how useful is it? Well, it's more useful against weaker creatures than more powerful creatures. You have to fail two consecutive morale saves, in addition to figuring in the creatures level you should figure in the level of the commander it is under the effect of. For any decent warband anything that wouldn't be smashed in one attack would have a net morale save of 10 or greater. This places the chance of enslavement at about 20%.

There is also a great deal of strategy involved in enslavement as well. Clearly you are not going to want to whack a fodder piece with the Balor and watch the poor creature go splatter all over the battle mat. Not when you could steal it! A savvy player will engage with a lesser creature against the fodder, one with an attack that will just barely force a morale save.

This also makes Tyrannical Morale a suprisingly good commander effect to have in this instance. You don't need to use it on the first save but you always use it on the second save. This suprisingly fits the pragmatic evilness of the LE faction: If I cannot have it no one can.

My Thoughts on Changing the Command Rules

2005-09-12T21:17:00.000-06:00

For those of you who have been in the dark, starting when War Drums is released the command rules will have their most significant changes since the game began: out of command units no longer limp along at speed 2. To be honest, the old "Speed 2 Rule" felt to me to me like it was a hold over from the some of the other wargaming rules that reflected larger scale battles. When simulating hundreds to thousands of combatants, especially in Napoleonic style engagements, command really is that important. But the D&D Miniatures Game is about heroic battles, not just any old heroic battles but heroic battles done D&D style. Heroic battles with adventuring parties full of independent thinkers encountering strange and dangerous monsters. Most importantly these heroes don't play around with jigsaw puzzles just to pick the field of battle.

But what effect will the rule change have? I feel that the speed 2 rule has had the most overwhelming effect of lost or poor command in the current rule, to the point of overshadowing the other and more strategic uses of command. What are some of these other aspects of command that are still important?

Rallying -- Unless you are under command you cannot rally from a rout. This is a bigger issue in 100pt play, which I fear may disappear from all but sealed play. But in 200pt play you can count on losing some morale saves some part of the time. Without the ability to rally those basically become "save or die" rolls.
Initiative -- Clearly a better commander lets you pick your time to act. The new 8 figure limit reduces the impact, but there will always be times that going first will always be better. Also, Commander 0 beats no commander in a tie. Would a Commander -1 beat no commander?
Command Effects -- These can turn a mediocre sealed band into a fearsome constructed cross-faction beast. They can also be the tech that turns a competitive constructed band into a champion.
Morale Bonus -- This is more an advantage for the Lawful factions, with their financially accessible commanders with ratings of 5 or more. This can turn a 1 in 4 shot into an even money bet and turn some of the better creatures that will almost never find a route to rout off the board.
Terrain and Setup Initiative -- Not only are the command rules changing, but the setup rules are changing to speed up play. Now players will roll initiative to pick the field of battle and then again to pick their initial positions. Controlling this aspect of the game can turn the tide as much, and possibly more than, crippling the speed of the bulk of your warband.

There is also some spill over to Independent creatures and those with Improved Coutnersong. While the Speed 2 rule seems to be the most overwhelming reason to bring creatures with Countersong into play the new rules really don't break the real benefits that much. Almost anytime you could place anyone under a Contersong sphere they could just Rush to you anyway, defeating the speed 2. It's the lack of morale bonuses and preventing of rallies that provide the real secret power of Improved Countersong. With the new rule Independent creatures can still rally without a commander. This makes those creatures merely overcosted for that ability. But since independents were overcosted anyway the rule is just firing a fresh arrow in the corpse so to say.

And remember, we don't know what the disposition of the Rush rule is. It could be gone, or it could be required when not under command.

SWAG: Speculation, Wild Assumptions, and Guesses

2005-08-24T20:08:00.000-06:00

As if you didn't get or see enough SWAG (Stuff We All Get) at Gen Con now you get some from me. Since I wasn't there (Solomon's choice between my wife's family reunion and spending large sums of money to play with little plastic dolls... how do you choose?!) I feel you should get some SWAG from me.

Speculation
There will be a map in War Drums that has either forest/jungle areas/features or the map will have forest or jungle in the title. Why? First off the Forest Troll. For some reason I just don't see a forest glen tile coming in the next started and time is awful short for Organized Play to release the Jungle Pool tile by January (it could happen). That alone wouldn't be enough. My corroborating evidence is the background pictures of the War Drums starter and boosters have a definite deep jungle theme.

Wild Assumptions
Wouldn't a miniatures block/cycle be cool? Allegedly the November 2006 set is going to be a huge set named Juggernaut. Sounds kind of martial. Could there be a theme for the next cycle around wars and such? Will the July 2006 set be named something martial as well, like "Battle Cry" or "Battle Scars?" Don't get too excited unless the next release of the floor rules allows for "block constructed" or "single expansion" tournaments and creates Harbinger and Abberations block tournaments. And don't hold your breath until January when they rev the floor rules for War Drums.

Guesses
The 2006 Epic Championships won't be at Gen Con Indy, not if WOTC knows what is good for the game. They should target Origins, Winter Fantasy, or some other convention that occurs during the early portions of the Constructed Qualifier seasons. Magic lives off of the 6 city alternating format pro tour and that it what keeps it going year round. The Dungeons and Dragons Miniatures Game can't afford 3 months of nationally tracked competitive down time without losing its steam.

Also, don't expect to see the word "Skirmish" on the cover or title page of the War Drums Rule booklet. It will soon become a trivia question like "What does the word "deckmaster" on the back of MTG cards mean?"

My thoughts on Maps

2005-08-09T21:55:00.000-06:00

Everybody's commenting on the speculated changes that are coming to the skirmish game, so here's my two cents. Executive summary: I don't think it can happen soon enough.

What I will focus mostly on is the change that is known for sure: maps will be used instead of tiles. I think this brings D&D Miniatures closer to the core of what it should be, tiny plastic dolls attacking other tiny plastic dolls. In many of my games a battle can absolutely be won or lost by good or bad tile placement. This is unbelievably important against a ranged attack based band, I literally won a game with a TPK and no figures lost on my part with a Double HEBI/Valanear Commander band in Cave of Pain because I routed all of his hitters before they could base anything meaningful. I attribute this entirely to good tile placement. Maps won't eliminate these situations but they will get rid of the amazingly abusive setups that a skilled placement can get against a non-skilled placement.

The down side is that I don't see thins going 100% until War Drums ships. The reason being every player conceivably will need to be able to bring a map to the game. I completely expect the retail kits to start shipping maps instead of tiles and templates, much like they did with the Lost Temple play mat. But to get the game to a point where you can expect all players to have a map won't happen until you can have players go out and just buy a map they could bring to the table. It may be possible when Fane of the Drow ships, but realistically there will be backlash when they require a map and the only feasible way to guarantee one is to get a RPG product. There would be mass cries of cramming a product.

Given the chatter on the boards from official sources it seems that this is a given. Comments such as "we will have from 12-15 maps available" as a metric seems to indicate that this will not happen any sooner than march of next year. One hope I am holding out is that the floor rules update after GenCon will allow for fixed map tournaments like are possible with the Giants of Legends "Lost Temple" play mat. We may get some official word as well as to how maps and specific scenarios will be handled with the new rules and the "effective march 2006" being appended parenthetically. But if there are any substantial changes that would result from the switch to maps I would expect another floor rules update just before the constructed championship season again.

Star Wars Minis Rules Updated: There Can be Only One (Winner, That Is)

2005-08-01T21:44:00.000-06:00

Did anyone notice today that the DCI floor rules for Star Wars Miniatures was updated today? Well, this will be an indication for what they are planning to do for D&D Miniatures.

First, they changed the standard scenario from Kill 'em All to "Standard Scenario." This scenario looks, smells, and tastes like Assault, except that there is only one scoring area: within four squares of the center of the board. I'd have to look at the star wars maps to see if that makes any maps better than others. But the major impact here is this: Assault isn't going to go away. Organized play likes it so much they are converting it to play with Star Wars.

Second, they deal with the "double win" situation. Victory is only checked at the end of a complete round. If both players meet the victory condition then the player with the most points wins. If still tied they keep playing complete rounds until a winner is determined. Very simple to state, elegant, and a piece of cake to officiate. No arguments about my flamethrower blasting an adjacent enemy and killing both, and the opponent claiming he wins the moment I resolve my effect.

Finally the biggest change, one I expect we will see in the first release of the 2006 rules. There are no ties, intentional or otherwise. What we have instead is double losses. If after all reasonable tie-breakers are exhausted we still have a tie both players lose. This also has direct impact on declared and indirect intentional draws, both players chalk up a loss. Going late into a tournoment you in effect have absolutely nothing to lose by playing, because you both have lost until one of you gives cause for either one of you to win. Another elegant and easy to officiate rule. It may not be a popular one but it eliminates a whole bunch of nasty "gaming the tournament" corner cases.

And by indirect intentional draw I mean where you both play but conspire to force a draw. "You win initiative," "ok, pass/pass," "pass/pass as well," etc. until the non-aggression rule kicks in. We both have zero with two 3 point figures on the corner of the assembly tile, so we draw.

Knee Jerk Analysis of Fane of Lolth Map

2005-07-28T09:14:00.000-06:00

Wizards has posted the map that will be used for the 2005 GenCon D&D Miniatures Championship. After looking at it for five minutes here are my knee jerk notes about it.

Obviously the map is not symmetrical. You will clearly need a running strategy from both sides of the map.
Staring areas and exists break from the tradition. Exists are in the middle of the short sides and are not part of Player A's start area.
Player B has a huge swath of area on almost all of the Left side of the map, 3x18 squares except for two trimed off the the lower left side. Player A has two start areas, one 6x4 and the other 5x6. It is unclear whtether or nat Player A can split their assembly.
First turn assult points will be more difficult. Victory Areas are deep in the opponents side of the board, and both requre a speed 10 or greater unit to score the points.
Victory areas are easily defendable fromt he start area. A speed 8 beater can attack any square in any victory area on turn one.
Execllent line of site, and excellent cover for medium figures as well. You can move your figure and gain cover if all you want is cover, but ranged figures will still have sweet spots where htey can threaten larg areas of the board.
There is significant line of sight into Start Area A on turn one with a move of 6. This has huge impact for figures with sight effects such as the Gauth and Beholder and spell slingers like the Red Wizard and Elf Pyromancer.
There are still some rules questions: What about Scout and Wandering Moster creatures? Cave Setup?

Next week I will post a bit more on this map after I look at it better.

Basic Functional Analysis of AngelFire

2005-07-18T21:03:00.000-06:00

So who are the winners of Angelfire, on a basic functional level? I'de Say Efreeti, Chrall, Wand Expert, WTF, Sword Archon, and Werebear. Although I'de have to say LG is the faction that least lived up to it's hype, and LE is the suprise winner in my book.

Functional Hit Points didn't set any new records or provide any suprises. The first efficient rare shows up at number 9, and it only made the list becuase it got 50% more hit points from conceal.

Attack wise, there are some suprise winners. The Wand Expert wins in average and full attack, because I'm counting the wands as attacks since they can be used when threatened. And a big WTF goes out to the Wrackpawn, winning the singe attack category thanks to it's DC 18 Pain 10 ability. It's painful just looking at that figure, so it's like another attack at +10 for 10 Magic. It must use it's third arm to feel around, since it poked it's eyes out and gimped a leg just to get some blind sight.

A new set also resets our percentiles to see what makes a great, good, ok, and bad number. (90%, 75%, 50%, and 25% respectivly).

Single Attack - .33 / .21 / .15 / .09
Full Attack - .41 / .30 / .20 / .12
Avg Attack - .36 / .26 / .18 / .11
FHP - 2.68 / 2.18 / 1.71 / 1.29

And now... the top ten lists.

Functional Hit Points Efficiency

	Name	FHPE	Faction
1	Caravan Guard	3.70	LG
2	Chraal	3.10	LE
3	Ophidian	2.70	CE
4	Dwarf Mercenary	2.67	L
5	Kobold Soldier	2.63	LE
6	Large Air Elemental	2.48	CG
7	Flamebrother Salamander	2.39	LE
8	Direguard	2.38	LE
9	Ghostly Consort	2.36	LE
10	Longstrider Ranger	2.35	CG

Average Attack Efficiecny

	Name	AAE	Faction
1	Wand Expert	0.61	CG
2	Efreeti	0.51	LE
3	WTF	0.47	CE
4	Wild Elf Raider	0.42	CG
5	Werebear	0.40	LE
6	Feral Minotaur	0.39	CE
7	Blackscale Lizardfolk	0.37	C
8	Sword Archon	0.35	LG
9	Chraal	0.32	LE
10	Large Air Elemental	0.31	CG

Full Attack Efficiecny

	Name	FAE	Faction
1	Wand Expert	0.76	CG
2	Efreeti	0.64	LE
3	Feral Minotaur	0.52	CE
4	Werebear	0.48	LG
5	WTF	0.47	CE
6	Troll Slasher	0.43	CE
7	Chraal	0.43	LE
8	Wild Elf Raider	0.42	CG
9	Large Air Elemental	0.41	CG
10	Thri-Kreen Barbarian	0.41	CG

Single Attack Efficiecny

	Name	SAE	Faction
1	WTF	0.47	CE
2	Wand Expert	0.45	CG
3	Wild Elf Raider	0.42	CG
4	Efreeti	0.38	LE
5	Sword Archon	0.35	LG
6	Blackscale Lizardfolk	0.33	C
7	Werebear	0.33	LG
8	Talenta Halfling	0.29	CG
9	Flamebrother Salamander	0.27	LE
10	Ghostly Consort	0.27	LE

Tactical Implications of High Functional Hit Point Efficiency

2005-07-12T21:42:00.000-06:00

After I did my posts on functional damage I didn't do any follow up posts on how to use that information. The biggest reason is that... duh... you go smash things with your high functional damage efficiency. All of the nuances in attack deal with other special abilities or with non numbers relate tricks. Things like how to abuse a cleave and patience in making your opponent to close so you can get the first full attack. But what about survivability numbers? Immediately I see two implications of this. One regarding your opponent's models and one involving your own.

When dealing with your own creatures with high FHP efficiency you need to realize that their most important role is as a pin cushion. Generally speaking the role of pin cushion is most important in the round that your figures close. When the contested ground has basically been determined, and you know where both of you are going to collide within the next round of movement, I like to send in as my first figure someone who will give me the most bang for the buck. Because whoever you send in to that death zone is going to get hit... a lot. And if they are hitting a creature they will get a low VP return from for their efforts you are setting yourself up for a victory when time is called.

My favorite creature in this regard for limited play is the Wood Woad. Cheap at 15 points, AC of 17 means about half of the lower costed figures will miss it, and 60 HP means that when they do, it's like whittling away at an oak tree. When we know where the collision will take place I send my bladeless lumberjack right in the place that will cause the most problems for my opponents navigating around. I do this fully intending for him to have four to six mid to low costed figures thrown at him to chop him down. That's a really good exchange, because that is four to six figures hitting my one figure. I can now take most of my other mid to low costed figures and attack the vulnerable weenies who haplessly tried to fell my timber terror. Striking second does have it's advantages.

The second implication deals with your opponents efficient figures, or more particularly their inefficient ones. In a timed environment, and especially in a sealed timed environment, games are often called before the victory condition is met. And even when time isn't called other ways of scoring victory points can leave many figures on the losing side still alive and kicking on the battle grid. The key here is, when all other considerations are equal and you are given a choice, focus on creatures with low efficiency first. These creatures are the ones that will reward you with more victory points for the same amount of effort.

This is most often seen when playing against the Zombie White Dragon. I usually do my best to ignore and/or distract this frozen lizard with as many crunchy fodder pieces as I can. While my 3 point wonders are being served to the winged icicle I focus the rest of my efforts collecting tile points and working on the rest of my opponents army. Four rounds of tile points are all it takes to not have to eliminate the Zombie White Dragon and still win the round. Since the amount of support pieces I tempt the dragon with average around 25 points I almost always come out ahead in that exchange.

Efficiency may not be everything, but an efficient strategy can go a long way towards victory.

Functional Hit Point Efficiency

2005-07-05T21:41:00.000-06:00

Much like attack efficiency, not all miniatures are created equal when it comes to their survivability. Some are pin cushions while others fall over if you sneeze too hard. The formula I used to calculate the functional hit point efficiency is the same I used to calculate attack efficiency: FHP/Cost. Almost all figures have a ration greater than one, and unlike the Functional Attack Efficiency the curve has more of an even middle group than a consistent drop off.

To give a perspective, 90% of the figures have an efficiency of less than 2.75, which is nearly half of the high water mark at the Dwarf Phalanx Fighter (and that is without special abilities). 75% are lower than 2.18, the median efficient is 1.71, and the 25th percentile is a paltry 1.29.

Here is the current top 20 list (still waiting for Angelfire spoilers) dominated mostly by the lawful folks. Bloodhulk Fighter doesn't belong, but that is because I haven't factored in the impact of his fragile ability, he has between 85 and 50 HP depending on who's hitting him, so his efficiency lies somewhere between 2.04 and 3.05, still high on the list however. This also shows how big a deal undead are when it comes to durability, not having to make morale saves makes a big difference!

	Figure	FHP	Efficiency
1	Dwarf Phalanx Soldier	60.75	5.06
2	Zombie White Dragon	162.50	4.39
3	Dread Guard	60.75	4.34
4	Wood Woad	63.00	4.20
5	Medium Astral Construct	42.00	4.20
6	Bloodhulk Fighter	110.00	4.07
7	Gnoll Skeleton	20.25	4.05
8	Zombie	15.75	3.94
9	Troglodyte Zombie	39.00	3.90
10	Hill Dwarf Warrior	15.00	3.75
11	Gnome Fighter	22.00	3.67
12	Zhentarim Fighter	25.00	3.57
13	Nothic	35.00	3.50
14	Thayan Knight	103.13	3.44
15	Halfling Veteran	37.63	3.42
16	Stalwart Paladin	30.00	3.33
17	Human Thug	12.75	3.19
18	Timber Wolf	15.50	3.10
19	Boneclaw	136.50	3.03
20	Celestial Dire Badger	27.13	3.01

Basic Functional Hit Points

2005-06-28T21:45:00.000-06:00

Calculating a simple means to give a linier value to the damage output of a figure was to me a straightforward task (see my previous post on Basic Functional Damage). Calculating a value for durability was not nearly as straightforward as I had hoped. I had many failed formulas that I was unsatisfied with, but I will spare you the details. Ultimately what I decided to do was what Guy suggested in a similar thread on the WOTC message boards: convert AC and other durability factors into an equivalent amount of HP. Factors I need to consider are AC, Morale (level and fearless), and Conceal. And the command rating of a commander can contribute to the functional HP of a figure incrementally. For simplicity rally is not considered.

First, I only take half of the printed HP value of the base. This is the only "Guaranteed" HP you have.
Next, I multiply the remaining half by the figures level/save, and divide by 20.
For Fearless creatures, I consider their level to be 20, effectively giving the other half of their HP.
Next I take the AC of the figure, subtract a normalized attack bonus, and divide by 20 to get the hit percentage, and then multiply that by the figures HP.
Finally I take the conceal percentage, multiply that by the functional HP at this point, and add it again.

The one item I had the most concern about what to use for the normalized attack bonus. I finally settled on +10. Why +10? Only one createure has an AC lowere than 10, the oddball Ochre Jelly has an AC of 4. But the lowest AC you will see in serious play is AC 10, and you will see it in the CG Inspired Frenzy band. My reasoning was that the lowest AC should offer no additional "functional HP." This also gives a baseline for a number, factoring in Fearless and ignoring Burnout that gives the Frenzied Berserker 90 Functional HP.

From this, we can derive the following formula, for what I shall call "Basic Functional Hit Points"

HP *	(Save + 2*AC)	*	19 + Conceal
	40		20

For creatures without the Conceal ability Conceal = 1
For Fearless creatures Save = 20

What results does this give us? The top 10 are...

	Figure	FHP
1	Large Silver Dragon	240
2	Fire Giant	196
3	Stone Golem	189
4	Frost Giant	175.5
5	Thaskor	175
6	Aspect of Bane	174
7	Large Red Dragon	171.88
8t	Zombie White Dragon	162.5
8t	Aspect of Nerull	162.5
10	Vrock	155.25

How Many Rounds to Play?

2005-06-21T05:37:00.000-06:00

I've noticed that the available rules for sanctioning really don't include a table any more for "how many rounds to play for x # of players." This is especially useful for events like the qualifiers and pre-releases with top-2^n knockout rounds. The premise was to show how many rounds to play and guarantee all of the no loss and one loss players a spot in the knockout rounds, and making the two loss crowd depend on early and solid wins (mostly for game win % and strength of opposition tie breakers).

That seems to be a simple enough standard to derive a solution from. In a Swiss format assume perfect point groups, ignore ties, and ignore a degenerate case where the top players all play each other in early rounds, and a chart can be derived. But since I am a computer scientist and not a mathematician I wrote a program to get my answer the brute force way (python 2.4 source code available here).

The first chart matches my memory of my days in MTG, some poor schmuck (wasn't me) signed up as the 213 player just before registration closed and forced a 9th round at one qualifier I was at.

Players	Rounds
4-8	1
9-10	2
11-16	3
17-24	4
25-40	5
41-64	6
65-128	7
129-212	8
213-?	9

But this table was predicated on top 8. D&D Miniatures has recently gone to top 4s, and the guarantee of making it in with only one loss ramps up the required rounds quicker.

Players	Rounds
4	1
5-8	3
9-10	4
11-16	5
17-32	6
33-52	7
53-96	8
97-160	9
161-?	10

The bizarre thing is that it doesn't make the tourney go any quicker round wise, in some cases (like at 33 players) it makes the tourney go a round longer! But when the prizes are only given to the top four, the upshot is that if you go to the break rounds you are guaranteed a prize. Otherwise top four prizes and a top 8 means you have one do-or-die round, even if you played the tourney perfect to this point.

Figureing out the Golaith Barbarian: How Good is the Re-Rolled Attack?

2005-06-14T14:29:00.000-06:00

The Goliath Barbarian, with it's reroll attack ability, poses a rather interesting number crunching problem when analyzing the statistics of a warband, just how good is it's ability? Clearly the piece is worth more than the +10/+5 (20) that is listed on the card, but just how much more? This is also useful to star wars players, since you can spend a force point to re-roll an attack roll you missed on.

To answer this question, I am going to resort to what amounts to applied elementary probability and statistics, and if it makes your head hurt just skip down to the chart. I call it elementary because I don't do this stuff for a living and it makes sense to me, therefore it can't be all that difficult. What I did was convert the "roll needed" to hit to a probability of hitting, at a simple 0.05 probability per side that can hit. Then I squared that probability to get the odds that I will miss twice. Once on the normal attack and once on the re-roll. The rest of the probability, split basically 50/50 is the odds I hit on the normal roll or the re roll. But I just calculated those together. Then I figured what an equivalent "hit number" would be for those odds, the difference between the two is the benefit from using the re-roll. Here is a chart summarizing the numbers.

Roll Needed	2x Miss Odds	Effective Roll Needed	Net Bonus
20	0.098	19.05	0.95
19	0.190	17.20	1.80
18	0.278	15.45	2.55
17	0.360	13.80	3.20
16	0.438	12.25	3.75
15	0.510	10.80	4.20
14	0.578	9.45	4.55
13	0.640	8.20	4.80
12	0.698	7.05	4.95
11	0.750	6.00	5.00
10	0.798	5.05	4.95
9	0.840	4.20	4.80
8	0.878	3.45	4.55
7	0.910	2.80	4.20
6	0.938	2.25	3.75
5	0.960	1.80	3.20
4	0.978	1.45	2.55
3	0.990	1.20	1.80
2	0.998	1.05	0.95

Armed with this information we have our answer, about +3/+4 on most attacks. Against a Large Silver dragon it's like having a +14/+5 attack (+13/+5 if buffed). Against an Orc Champion it's +10/+10 (+13 on a single attack), against an Ogre Ravager it's +10/+10 or +14 on a single attack. Against a Frenzied Bezerker it's +10/+8, not so special there. Between the primary and secondary attacks it is most effective against ACs between 15 and 23, i.e. most of the beaters!

Here is a quick comparison chart for a Goliath re-rolling an attack against a particular AC.

Primary		Secondary
30	+11	25	+6
29	+12	24	+7
28	+13	23	+8
27	+13	22	+8
26	+14	21	+9
25	+14	20	+9
24	+15	19	+10
23	+15	18	+10
22	+15	17	+10
21	+15	16	+10
20	+15	15	+10
19	+15	14	+10
18	+15	13	+10
17	+14	12	+9
16	+14	11	+9
15	+13	10	+8
14	+13	9	+8
13	+12	8	+7
12	+11	7	+6

A Balanced Solution to the CE Hordes: Making CE "Hate" Miniatures

2005-06-06T13:10:00.000-06:00

Even with he banning of the Drider the CE bands are still running roughshod over most of the field. While not 100% dominating they are shaping the field in that only skilled play or another CE band will be a reliable way to beat them. DeathKnell was supposed to provide LE the minis it needed to be on top, but the old big stick standbys are still ruining the LE fun.

What is really needed is minis that are decent to OK for their faction but are ones CE would just hate to see. However they cannot strictly be better than the other minis or else we have merely set a new standard for minis.

Honor Guard
Lawful Good; 24 points; Made up (1/1, Uncommon) Humanoid (Human)
Level: 6
Speed: 6
AC: 15
HP: 55
Melee Attack: +11/+6 (5)
Courage against Evil (Gains Fearless if this mini can see an Evil Enemy)
Chaotic Bane (Melee Attack +2, Melee Damage +10 against Chaotic)

Against a LG band, A Warforged Hero is strictly better. Against a LE/CG band the Hero is slightly better. Against CE? Load up your warband! The Honor guard dislikes chaos and evil, but it just hates chaos and evil.

Three Pillars of an Effective Warband

2005-05-24T19:34:00.000-06:00

Command: This pillar can vacillate between being core and support. However, given the uniqueness of it's role when it comes to rally checks and enabling full speed movement it deserves it's own pillar. Without a command unit you will almost certianly lose. Of course there are exceptions like Ochre Jelly x10 + Grick, but the very nature of that warband is in itself non-traditional.

Some commanders are principally support and command pieces, the Inspiring Marshal and Cleric of Yondalla are perfect examples of those. Others are meant to contribute as core pieces. Red Wizard, Ryld, and the Eye of Gruumsh are examples of those.
Core: This is the most important part of almost any warband. What makes a model a core piece and not a support piece? The core of the warband are the pieces that will be principally responsible for eliminating the bulk of your opponents warband. The methods and means can vary, from melee damage (Frenzied Bezerker, Orc Champion), ranged damage (Centaur Hero, Half-Elf Bow Initiate), special abilities (Beholder, Purple Dragon Knight), or spells (Red Wizard, Deathlock). Generally speaking, however, they need to have the ability to remove enemy figures by themselves.

The core of the warband is also the part of the warband that cannot be foolishly squandared without losing the game. This is not the same as the part of the warband that your opponent may be initially targeting to take you down, but it is a part that you must ensure scores more victory points than it is worth.
Support: The last pillar is support. Not Fodder, not Filler, but support. Every piece that belongs in a warband that isn't in the core or command element provides a support role. Support pieces by themselves, and no matter their number or point cost, are not capable of eliminating the bulk of the opposition warband. However, they do provide important functions that enhance the core element's role of creature killer. Some figures provide direct secondary damage through spells like searing light. Others allow for core figures to deal more damage by enhancing stats with magic weapon or allowing for more attacks via snakes swiftness or transposition. Some increase the survivability by boosting AC, healing wounds, or (again) providing transposition.

Finally, some pieces provide support by being there to increase the activation count or to be closer to the opponent than any other figure, the fodder/filler role. Even when it has nothing more to offer than being there (*cough* Gnome Recruit *cough*) any piece can provide some support functionality.

Tourney Info Posted by WOTC

2005-05-12T09:57:00.000-06:00

Wizards has posted information on two tournaments that we have been waiting for, first the details for the 2005 Gen Con Indy Championship and the Angelfire prerelease. I don't see them linked on either main page but they will be coming soon since my RSS reader picked up the news stories.

But WOTC deserves two bravos for their announcement. First, the top 8 for the championships will be on Sunday! Plenty of time to get more food poisoning and lose more sleep.

Bravo #2 goes out because they also announced the date of the Angelfire prerelease w/o a list of venues. First, this gives you opportunity to lean on your FLGS to try and host the event if they are vacillating. Second, this gives at least a months warning for a big tournament. It's actually closer to a month and a week. Yes, Angelfire is that close! I think that is better to delay the venue announcements or announce a partial list than to hold up the entire process for a few lagers. Adding venues, when properly announced, is a good surprise.

Running Blinds

2005-05-11T12:32:00.000-06:00

Here is another instance where Skirmish is more like chess than some of the other miniatures games. The situation is that you need to kill the wounded Grim Necromancer who has so kindly summoned 20 points of undead. The problem is that one of them is closer than the grim necromancer, and he is an especially bashy undead as well.

Charging to get close won't work, since even an enemy spellcaster prevents you from casting a spell. And the safe spot on the other side of the Necromancer is far on the other side. What's a squishy warlock to do?

When I played paintball I did a lot of running from cover position to cover position. Just like in skirmish if they can't see you generally they can't hit you. Sometimes you needed to run a long way between bunkers but needed some cover so you wouldn't be shot out. One tactic was to "Run a blind" where you would use a third bunker between you and the person covering you. With this bunker in the way, even if it was 20 yards away, you could still run safely because you would be "blind" to your opponent. Because the bunker was in the way he couldn't see you. You could run up and down the corridor it formed all day, at least until someone else could see you.

The trick here is the same, to use some intervening walls to make the closest visible creature and the closest creature two different miniatures. If you move the warlock two squares to the right he now has no line of sight to the Minotaur Skeleton, and just barely has line of sight to the Grim Necromancer.

Unlike RPG Skirmish doesn't have ranged touch, so the obscene amount of cover the warlock has is not an issue.

With a little creative movement, the Warlock has just netted 55 points and 3 figures removed from your opponents squad. Not bad for being such a renegade!