Courting the Improbable, Part 2

A little while ago I started musing aloud (aprint?) about the nature of improbability in our game, and digressed into a comparison of models who are expected to be good vs models that are expected to be bad, and how the improbable events differ inversely in their value.

Now, I want to look at more systemic improbabilities, which in 6th ed 40k have multiplied to a level not seen since 2nd ed.

The genesis of this line of thinking goes back to my days playing BloodBowl, still my favourite GW game, though unfortunately I lost my board and many of my models. Back in the day, I played it as much as I could, ventured to a tourney a year for a few years running, read BloodBowl stuff on the tubez, etc. And the constant theme was 'minimise your risk'.



I don't know how many of my audience know of BloodBowl, but if you think of it as American football in the Warhammer fantasy world you won't go too far wrong. One mechanic in particular helped to really capture the 'sports' feel of the game: the turnover. In essence, if you mucked up any action badly enough, that automatically ended your turn. As you can no doubt imagine, having a turn truncated at an inopportune moment could be extremely damaging.

Thus, the doctrine of risk minimisation emerged. After all, to get more out of your turn, you need to failing fewer actions, and if you take fewer risks you are less likely to fail early. Naturally, there are other aspects like prioritising actions and overall strategy, which I won't go into here. However, by focussing only on minimising risks, many players fall into a very conservative play-style.

I've always thought that this was only half of the picture. To truly balance the ledger, one needs to maximise the rewards. Thus, to succeed at BloodBowl, the best strategy is not simply to minimise risk, but to maximise the risk to reward ratio.

For example, in the early stages of a BloodBowl half, the risk of turning the ball over to the opposition is large, as they have time to make sure you pay for it. In the later stages of a half, the value of a touchdown often outweighs the risk that the opposition may acquire the ball, and so can be worth using unlikely but possible schemes - with sufficient cover. Never stop trying for a score, because you never know when things will turn out exactly right.

In the early days of 6th ed, I saw a lot of moaning on the internet about random charge length in particular, and how the best way to deal with it was simply to get as close as possible. Minimise the risk. Suddenly, I was flashing back to BloodBowl. Don't just minimise the risk, maximise the reward!

Some of the guys to benefit most from the random charge length change are MEQ jump pack squads, who had their threat range significantly extended. Good saves help mitigate the results of failed charges. Monstrous creatures and walkers suddenly project an 18" radius circle of assault threat! Will the fail charges sometimes? Sure, and sometimes they'll look stupid after picking their noses from 4" away. But other times, they can rampage a ridiculous distance across the board, punishing your opponent badly for relying on 'average' rolls. If you let them.

Moving on from random charge length, there are two other major sources of improbable swings of fate that leap to mind; Overwatch, and Seizing the Initiative.

Overwatch has introduced to the game an extra firing phase, and a last-ditch 'get out of assault free' card. Unless you're a Thousand Son, in which case you are SOL, but not just on that front :) . So you need 6s to hit. Fire enough bullets, some of them will hit.

Naturally, this is a great way to make the most of your own overwatch - add more shots. The more rolls you have, the more chances you have to do something cool. For extra fun, play Orks or similar where the low native BS is compensated for by shooting often, which totally overcompensates overwatch. And if you have a unit with great overwatch - whether through more dakka, psychic powers and other buffs or both, perhaps you want to try baiting your opponent's assault with that unit, just to do the extra overwatch damage. If you're better at judging distances (or the risk of your opponent failing the assault after your overwatch casualties), they might even be stranded in the open.

Of course from the other side, overwatch can really put a crimp in your plans if you want to be in melee.  What to do? First, be aware of the risk. Second, weigh the risk. If the payoff from some of my wyches connecting with their target outweighs the risk of them being crippled by overwatch, then I'll do it every time. If the risk outweighs the benefit, find something squishier to kill. And if its really line-ball, consider finding something disposable to tank the shots for you, or some other way around.

Seizing the Initiative is a similar proposition, transposed to the realm of the strategic. If you have the first turn, then you need to assess the risk of your opponent seizing when you deploy. If you judge the risk (a known chance of him successfully seizing and an inferred chance of him attempting it, multiplied by the damage to your forces and battleplan that a sudden inversion of the turn order will inflict) to be less than the reward of deploying aggressively, then by all means do so. Just be aware that you are taking a risk, and the purpose served by that risk (ie don't have a cry if it all comes tumbling down). Equally, if you can't justify the risk, then build some defensive measures into your deployment.

On the other side of the table, I have sometimes considered going second and playing for the Seize when faced with a bad match up. Deploying very aggressively and successfully seizing can reverse the fortunes of the game so dramatically that if you think you are on a hiding to nothing it can be worth a try. Of course, at least five times out of six it will fail, and you'll look stupid, although if the matchup was so bad you might merely have brought forward the inevitable. One time out of six you will cover yourself in glory.

Putting all of your army's eggs in one seize-shaped bucket is pretty risky, but I think its always a good idea to have some forces able to take advantage on the off-chance of a seize. If you haven't done so, you need to not be attempting to seize in the first place - which can be perfectly fine, if for example you dramatically outrange your opponent, just remember that you planned it that way!

In short (ha!), there are plenty of improbable outcomes that can shape events on the tabletop far more than we tend to credit. Make sure that there are ways that things can go right as well as wrong.

If you really wanted to minimise the risk, you'd keep your army on the parade ground. Remember the rewards, and maximise the ratio. Play for the score.