PDA

View Full Version : What is statistically better: +1T or +1Armor



Arhurt
01-05-2009, 20:30
What is statistically better, to have a higher Toughness or better armor?

Taking a MEQ as a base, would the unit benefit more (take less wounds) from an increase to T5 or A2+?

Lord Damocles
01-05-2009, 20:32
Presumably it's largely dependant on what's firing at them.

Against Necrons, a 2+ save is teh winz.

Against Guard, T5 is probably superior.

The_Outsider
01-05-2009, 20:35
+1 Toughness.


Why? It is far far easier to get around a 2+ save that it being T5 (or higher) - especially given we are using a MEQ as base, T5 is downright awesome - it makes the model virtually immune to instant death via double strength attacks as well as meaning S4 attacks will do bugger all against them.

kultz
01-05-2009, 20:43
Really depends on what's firin' at them, but for the most part, t5.

There are many weapons that ignore armour, few that ignores toughness.

Bunnahabhain
01-05-2009, 20:51
AV2+ is better for MEQs

For AP- to 4, a 2+ save instead of a 3+ half's the number of wounds taken, and for AP3 it decreases it by 5/6th. It's only vs AP 2 or 1 it does nothing.

For hits at: S3 T5 halves the wounds taken, S4 it reduces them by 1/3rd, S5 it reduces it by 1/4, and S6 it reduces it by 1/5, whilst for S7+, it does nothing, except related to instant death etc.

Unless you are taking a very high proportion of AP1/2 fire, then better armour will offer more protection than increased toughness.

EDIT: Guard players mistake, I forgot about power weapons. The difference between ahaving to make 16 5+ saves, or not getting 11 5+ saves for a squad doesn't really matter....
They does skew the numbers of Ap2 hits rather.


However, if you run the analysis again, with say GEQ as the target unit you might get a different answer.

BuFFo
01-05-2009, 20:57
Toughness is all around better.

My IG cant do f-all against Plague Marines. Even my LRBT can't remove their Feel No Pain because of their toughness 5.

Badger[Fr]
01-05-2009, 21:00
My IG cant do f-all against Plague Marines. Even my LRBT can't remove their Feel No Pain because of their toughness 5.
Toughness 4(5), so Battlecanon shots cause Instant Death...

CrownAxe
01-05-2009, 21:18
+1T

T reduces the number of hits to a fraction, then the save reduces that fraction to a smaller fraction

so if you make T reduce the number hits to a smaller fraction, it in turn lets the save reduce to a smaller fraction

chain reaction

incarna
01-05-2009, 21:39
Vs T4 Sv 4+; 8 Str4 Ap – shots will wound with 4 and 2 saves will fail.
Vs. T5 Sv 4+; 8 Str4 Ap – shots will wound with 2.66 and 1.33 saves will fail.
Vs. T 4 Sv 3+, 8 Str4 Ap – shots will wound with 4 and 1.33 saves will fail.

Mathematically, both are the same against average small arms fire.

What you need to look at is every aspect of the game. Every army has a “standard” weapon and an improved toughness will not benefit you more than an improved armor save against any of them and vice versa.

Against weapons normally designd to take down vehicles – las cannons and melta guns. You’re screwed no matter what’s higher.

Against plasma – you’re screwed either way too.

Against weapons designed to take out infantry – heavy bolters, flamers, autocannons. It’s the same either way.

But what about power weapons? Clearly the 2+ save isn’t gonna help you but an increased T will.
Conversely, you have crack missiles. A 2+ save is far more valuable than in improved T.

Power fists, you’re screwed either way.

I’d say, pond for pound, nether is, on average, more beneficial than the other.

BuFFo
01-05-2009, 21:42
;3531685']Toughness 4(5), so Battlecanon shots cause Instant Death...

Checks Chaos Space Marines Codex... Finds it in pile of books... Blows dust off cover.... Checks Plague Marines.....

Dammit... Thats the last time I trust my friends judgment. Next time I am going to be all up in his book making sure he has a skraggin' clue instead of trusting his failing memory.

tuebor
01-05-2009, 21:47
I think it depends on what your starting armor save is. Going from a 6+ to a 5+ armor save really doesn't do you all that much good, while going from a 4+ to a 3+ is huge.

Toughness is almost always good, but I know I'd rather be up against a force of SM Scouts than a force of SoB because I've I've got a lot more AP4 or better stuff than I have AP3 or better.

Fire Harte
01-05-2009, 21:50
Really depends on what's firin' at them, but for the most part, t5.

There are many weapons that ignore armour, few that ignores toughness.

Imma firin' mah lazor! :o -----------------

:evilgrin::eyebrows:

I had to mate sorry... :p

---

But aye I agree with this here chap.

Lovejoy
01-05-2009, 21:57
+1 T from 3 to 4 is helpful, but not amazing. From 4 to 5, however, is huge - especially for multi-wound units. It's the one thing that's convinced me to take some Ogryns finally. T5 means all those S8 weapons are no longer instant death, so 3 wounds is worthwhile at last.

Jernmajoren
01-05-2009, 22:01
I think it depends on what your starting armor save is. Going from a 6+ to a 5+ armor save really doesn't do you all that much good, while going from a 4+ to a 3+ is huge.

Toughness is almost always good, but I know I'd rather be up against a force of SM Scouts than a force of SoB because I've I've got a lot more AP4 or better stuff than I have AP3 or better.

I agree, and the same goes for toughness, going from 3 -> 4 wont help alot against a battle cannon, neither will going from SV6 -> SV5..
On the other hand going from toughness 6 -> 7 or save 3 -> 2 will have a big impact.
So it depends on the starting point compared to the weapon its compared against.
Overall the average stat of basic inf weapons are str 4 ap 5 so anything improving on top of that is good, improvements that are less than ->T5 or -> SV4 will have mostly minor ingame effect imo.

catbarf
01-05-2009, 22:23
+1T

T reduces the number of hits to a fraction, then the save reduces that fraction to a smaller fraction

so if you make T reduce the number hits to a smaller fraction, it in turn lets the save reduce to a smaller fraction

chain reaction

Uh, no. Stats don't work like that. A 2+ followed by 3+ is the same as 3+ followed by 2+.

Kirasu
02-05-2009, 01:21
I dont understand the discussion about low Strength or AP4-6. As others have stated its exactly the same. T4 is 16% worse than T5.. and 3+ save is 16% worse than 2+. Increasing a stat by 1 and decreasing another by 1 = same result

If you start with a model that is T5 and 2+ save and you must reduce 1 stat. a T5 3+ = same as T4 with 2+

Only difference is against weapons that ignore saves. S7+ AP3 weapons > T5 and S6 or less and AP2 > 2+ save

Remember tho, a lot of models with a 2+ save ALSO have an invulnerable save

Kalec
02-05-2009, 02:27
It depends entirely on what the model is being shot with.

Most guns that go through 2+ and 3+ saves aren't going to care about about either. There are those with lower AP then normal, and those with higher S then normal, that would do worse against higher T and lower saves respectively. And then there is close combat which favors toughness over armor saves for the most part.

For shooting it more or less evens out unless you are throwing feel no pain into the mix.

Axis
02-05-2009, 07:56
It depends what the T and AS of the model is to start with. If you have no armour or 6+ then toughness is better. If you have a 3+ armour save then i think probably armour is better. Not sure about a 5+ armour save.. the benefits of 4+ save are very good (get saves vs bolters) so i say it depends on the toughness (but probably usually toughness)

Vaktathi
02-05-2009, 08:04
+1T would be my gut first reaction, but it also depends on the save of the model. Going from a 4+ to a 3+ is a *huge* leap, but going from a 6 to a 5 or a 3 to a 2 isn't going to net as big of a jump in survivability. Against most attacks, I'd say +1 T would be the way to go unless it's already like T6 or something.

Shadowlance
02-05-2009, 08:18
+1T would be my gut first reaction, but it also depends on the save of the model. Going from a 4+ to a 3+ is a *huge* leap, but going from a 6 to a 5 or a 3 to a 2 isn't going to net as big of a jump in survivability. Against most attacks, I'd say +1 T would be the way to go unless it's already like T6 or something.


yeah you got it right man, thats the way to go:D

Poseidal
02-05-2009, 08:33
+1T would be my gut first reaction, but it also depends on the save of the model. Going from a 4+ to a 3+ is a *huge* leap, but going from a 6 to a 5 or a 3 to a 2 isn't going to net as big of a jump in survivability. Against most attacks, I'd say +1 T would be the way to go unless it's already like T6 or something.

Although going 4+ to 3+ is a huge leap, it's only because of the AP system, and too many things like Heavy Bolters having AP4.

Statistically, going from a 3+ to 2+ save is actually a larger leap: It's halving the fail chance while going 4+ to 3+ is only going from 50% to 33%, which is a 1/3 better rather than 1/2.

Maine
02-05-2009, 10:04
Uh, no. Stats don't work like that. A 2+ followed by 3+ is the same as 3+ followed by 2+.

Only when it really is a 2+/3+ vs 3+/2+. In this case, the actual results desired are opposite; the real values are 2+/2- vs 3+/1-.

Chance of being wounded when opponent needs 3+ and then you need to fail a 2+: 2/3s * 1/6 = 2/18

Chance of being wounded when opponent needs 2+ and then you need to fail a 3+: 5/6 * 1/3 = 5/18.


I wrote a quick program to average the odds of taking a wound against every combination of Str 1 to 9, AP- to AP1, for T4 Sv3+, T5 Sv3+, and T4 Sv2+, and both with a 4+ cover save.

The results are as followed (Lower is Better)

Base T4 Sv3+ vs S[1..9], AP[1..-]
T4 Sv3+ wound rate: 0.355
T5 Sv3+ wound rate: 0.298 (16% improvement)
T4 Sv2+ wound rate: 0.232 (35% improvement)
T4 Sv3+ (Cover) wound rate: 0.232
T5 Sv3+ (Cover) wound rate: 0.195
T4 Sv2+ (Cover) wound rate: 0.150

This shows that Sv+1 gives more than twice the improvement than T+1, both in and out of 4+ cover.

I next changed the S range to a more realistic 3..7 (eliminating the two values on either extreme end) and factored out AP1 and AP2, and the results are:

Base T4 Sv3+ vs S[3..7], AP[3..-]
T4 Sv3+ wound rate: 0.296
T5 Sv3+ wound rate: 0.233
T4 Sv2+ wound rate: 0.106
T4 Sv3+ (Cover) wound rate: 0.232
T5 Sv3+ (Cover) wound rate: 0.183
T4 Sv2+ (Cover) wound rate: 0.106

Once again, Sv+1 is superior to T+1, in fact the increase in survivability is nearly triple out of cover.

I also plugged in GEQ on a whim with S3..7 and AP3..-, and got:
.636/.549/.513(/.367/.317/.367)
Sv improvement is better, but less drastically so, and considering it offers no extra improvement in cover, for a GEQ, T4 is better overall.

As for the Sv4+ to Sv3+ argument, heres a T4 Sv4+ with various improvements:

Base T4 Sv4+ vs S[3..7], AP[3..-]
T4 Sv4+ wound rate: 0.443
T5 Sv4+ wound rate: 0.35
T4 Sv3+ wound rate: 0.296
T4 Sv4+ (Cover) wound rate: 0.317
T5 Sv4+ (Cover) wound rate: 0.25
T4 Sv3+ (Cover) wound rate: 0.232

Sv is still the better improvement all around.

One final disclaimer: these odds don't take into account the rate of appearance of these weapons on the battlefield; it assigns equal weight to every combination.

Code available here: http://pastebin.com/m69e67d57

Sekhmet
02-05-2009, 10:16
IMO depends. In your example, I'd probably take 2+ if they're single wound models. Why? Most things at AP2 are S7+, making t5 the same as t4, unless it's a power weapon. If it's a CC unit, I'd take the toughness because exactly that.

Also if say you're going from 5+ to 4+, I'd take that over t3 to t4. Why? You get a 4+ save against the most common weapons in the game where before you got no save (shuricats, pulse rifles, gauss flayers and BOLTERS).

Also, 4+ to 3+ save for similar reasons... most high rate-of-fire anti-infantry weapons are AP4, so 3+ saves are great in that they give you saves vs heavy bolters, shuricannons, autocannons, gauss cannons, etc.

Now if I were t7, I'd take the bump to t8 without hesitation. Being invulnerable to marines' standard shooting and CC is amazing.

samiens
03-05-2009, 19:32
Well a 1/6 improvement either way is potentially the same effect mathematically- so statistically the question is much of a muchness. However, factoring in 40k rules- it simply depends against what- a marine going up 1 toughness against a starcannon is much less effective than going up be one on save (I mean improving lol)

In general, I'd take the save. As for the plague marine comment- a 3+ followed by a 4+ save is effectively a 2+ save- so plagues are buffed by a full 3rd in survivability.