PDA

View Full Version : Multiwound weapons in 8th



Feefait
03-11-2011, 16:36
Scenario:

Doomwheel rolld up next to a unit of Ogres and zzzaps them. 3 hits, wounding twice with a 6,6,1. Rolling to wound the doomwheel gets 5,5 for 10 total wounds. How many ogres are removed?

Van Horstmann
03-11-2011, 16:42
Two, just two i believe.

TsukeFox
03-11-2011, 17:25
Two, just two i believe.

Which is soo lame

theunwantedbeing
03-11-2011, 17:37
2 hits, 2 removed models. That's it I think, I can't be bothered to trawl through the rulebook though....somebody else will no doubt.

Agoz
03-11-2011, 17:37
yep, just two, the two sixes become 3's because ogres only have 3 wounds each, which means a total of 7 wounds.

Mr_Rose
03-11-2011, 18:25
This is not a new feature of the eighth edition rules; 8e is just the first to make it really clear in the core rules. The fundamental principle is that one hit should never kill more than one model. Thus, if you want a given weapon to kill lots of models, you need to give it a way of causing lots of hits rather than lots of wounds.

Lord Inquisitor
03-11-2011, 18:28
Which is soo lame

It would also only kill two empire soldiers, not 10. You got two 3-wound ogres rather than two 1-wound empire soldiers. How is this lame?

a18no
03-11-2011, 18:35
Which is soo lame

7 wounds with only 3 hits... more than double the effiency of the machine... what is lame in that?

sulla
03-11-2011, 20:33
Which is soo lameHopefully GW will give you a more powerful armybook in the next edition...:rolleyes::D:p

T10
03-11-2011, 20:52
Which is soo lame

Presuambly you'd like to see the Doomwheel cause the full 13 wounds on the unit, causing four dead Ogres and a carry-over wound? It seems a bit too effective for an attack that only has caused 3 hits.

Mercules
03-11-2011, 20:59
The fundamental principle is that one hit should never kill more than one model.

Yes but not a rule. Please don't say it this way because sometime in the future this may not be true.

The actual rule is that a model may not take more wounds than it has on it's profile from a single hit. This is a subtle, but important difference.

T10
04-11-2011, 08:41
I am not aware of any situation* where a hit would cause more than one model to be removed. Even a hit from a template attacks is first translated into causing a number of individual hits, and those are resolved individually.

-T10

*) Well, there's the grail reliquae where a single may cause multiple wounds, and those wounds result in rank-and-file models being removed.

oldWitheredCorpse
04-11-2011, 08:52
The same goes for dangerous terrain tests - you can't lose more models than tests failed.

Mercules
04-11-2011, 13:10
I am not aware of any situation* where a hit would cause more than one model to be removed. Even a hit from a template attacks is first translated into causing a number of individual hits, and those are resolved individually.

-T10

*) Well, there's the grail reliquae where a single may cause multiple wounds, and those wounds result in rank-and-file models being removed.

Wounded Champion + Wounded RnF model last one in the unit other than the Champ, say Ogres. Both have 1 wound remaining. RnF model is hit with a Multi-wound weapon which does 5 wounds. Wounds are capped at 3 so unit takes 3 wounds. RnF model dies from 1 and the Champ from the other because once all the RnF models are gone any additional wounds to the unit go to the Champ.

2 models die from one hit.

Cambion Daystar
04-11-2011, 13:28
Wounded Champion + Wounded RnF model last one in the unit other than the Champ, say Ogres. Both have 1 wound remaining. RnF model is hit with a Multi-wound weapon which does 5 wounds. Wounds are capped at 3 so unit takes 3 wounds. RnF model dies from 1 and the Champ from the other because once all the RnF models are gone any additional wounds to the unit go to the Champ.

2 models die from one hit.
Euhm, could you give a page references for this? Wounds are not capped at starting wounds, but at remaining wounds i believe. You'd have to choose where the hit goes before multiplying

Mercules
04-11-2011, 14:20
Euhm, could you give a page references for this? Wounds are not capped at starting wounds, but at remaining wounds i believe. You'd have to choose where the hit goes before multiplying

You would be wrong. It is capped at Wounds on Profile.

Pg. 45 BRB

TsukeFox
04-11-2011, 17:26
Hopefully GW will give you a more powerful armybook in the next edition...:rolleyes::D:p

I am hopeful-!
The doomrocket should at least have a reload-who would not carry extra ammo for such a weapon-??


But realy I just said the so lane part cause I am confused why etc limits doomwheels to 0-1. The thing has a fair chance to blow itself up-it is far from being OP.

T10
04-11-2011, 18:22
Wounded Champion + Wounded RnF model last one in the unit other than the Champ, say Ogres. Both have 1 wound remaining. RnF model is hit with a Multi-wound weapon which does 5 wounds. Wounds are capped at 3 so unit takes 3 wounds. RnF model dies from 1 and the Champ from the other because once all the RnF models are gone any additional wounds to the unit go to the Champ.

2 models die from one hit.

Well, I'd say that's two models dead from at least three hits, since the unit and the champion each would have had to suffer at least one hit to create this this situation.

Mercules
04-11-2011, 18:41
Not in the same combat though. :) It could be from a Sniper shot on the Champ and a left over wound from arrows falling at random on the RnF.

Cambion Daystar
04-11-2011, 18:48
You would be wrong. It is capped at Wounds on Profile.

Pg. 45 BRB

That page also says excess wounds are wasted.
It even says in the example that a a hit only kills a single model: "...but a cannonball that hits a single elf should always only kill a single elf, regardless of how mighty the blow"
-> one hit - one kill

eron12
04-11-2011, 18:52
You would be wrong. It is capped at Wounds on Profile.

Pg. 45 BRB


That page also says excess wounds are wasted.
It even says in the example that a a hit only kills a single model: "...but a cannonball that hits a single elf should always only kill a single elf, regardless of how mighty the blow"
-> one hit - one kill

It says wounds in excess of the profile characteristic are wasted. While I think this was a result of poor wording rather than deliberate action, Mercules is right, a multiwould attack on an ogre will do a max of 3 wounds, regardless of the remaining wounds.

T10
04-11-2011, 18:58
Not in the same combat though. :) It could be from a Sniper shot on the Champ and a left over wound from arrows falling at random on the RnF.

That still adds up to at least three hits.

Cambion Daystar
04-11-2011, 18:59
And it also says that 1 hit also only ever kills 1 model, so i don't really see the problem.

Lord Inquisitor
04-11-2011, 19:38
And it also says that 1 hit also only ever kills 1 model, so i don't really see the problem.

Where?

Mercules' example is extremely specific (there has to be only 1 trooper and 1 champion and both already taken wounds for it to occur, so vanishingly unlikely that can pretty much be ignored) but it does work as far as I can tell.

It's also the only scenario I've thought of where a multiwound weapon could kill more than one model with a single hit, but heh, it's always a good one to confuse everyone :shifty:.

Cambion Daystar
04-11-2011, 19:49
p45, right column, 20-ish line:

"...but a cannonball that hits a single elf should always only kill a single elf, regardless of how mighty the blow"

Lord Inquisitor
04-11-2011, 20:02
Hmm. Good point. I think we can extrapolate that a cannonball that hits a single Ogre should always only kill a single Ogre?

Problem is, with the multi-wound rules, wounds "spill over". If I have a unit of ogres and one has taken 2 already and I get hit by a doomwheel who hits and wounds with one shot and rolls 3 wounds - I don't get to remove one ogre and say the remaining wounds are wasted.

The champion/r-n-f situation described by Merc is a logical extension of that.

Cambion Daystar
04-11-2011, 20:30
Where is this mechanic for wounds spilling over in the rules?

Remember, in the paragraph i just quoted from, it says a single multiwound is distinctly different from multiple single wounds.

popisdead
04-11-2011, 20:45
The thing has a fair chance to blow itself up-it is far from being OP.

T6 is far from being OP? Try playing against a couple them instead of complaining you get free wounds, bonus toughness and more.

Mercules
04-11-2011, 20:58
Where is this mechanic for wounds spilling over in the rules?

Remember, in the paragraph i just quoted from, it says a single multiwound is distinctly different from multiple single wounds.

Ignore the hits inflicting multiple wounds part since it refers to single wound models.

Under Multi-wound Models and Multi-wound Weapons.


Add up all the wounds cause on the unit and then remove the appropriate number of models, noting any spare wounds on the unit.

Cambion Daystar
04-11-2011, 21:00
But that part is not under Multi-wound Weapons.

Edit: this is a blatant lie and i will go and eat a cookie to apologize

Mercules
04-11-2011, 21:36
So... you are saying "Multi-wound Models and Multi-wound Weapons" is not "Multi-wound Weapons"? riiiiiiiiiiiiight.... :rolleyes:

Cambion Daystar
04-11-2011, 21:50
So... you are saying "Multi-wound Models and Multi-wound Weapons" is not "Multi-wound Weapons"? riiiiiiiiiiiiight.... :rolleyes:

Haha you're totally right. I totally mixed up the paragraphs "Hits inflicting multiple wounds" and "multi wound models and..."

Feefait
05-11-2011, 02:50
The issue is under wultiwound models it says it caps at their wounds. but under multiwound weapons it does say add up the total rolled and that many wounds are done. All it needs to say to clear this up is "remember, you cannot cause more casualties than hits" or something to that effect. but it doesn't. My thought is that it's just another way they've simplified 8th since in ages past that was always, always true. We will play it as number of hits = number of models removed but I am not so sure this isn't a house rule that makes us feel better. :)

Mercules
05-11-2011, 17:44
Why is there an issue? The rare case where you can actually kill more models than you hit is so rare as to not come up. My point however is that I personally hate when people use a "rule of thumb" that is not based on the actual rule. Why, because there is that rare case that MIGHT come up and someone who uses the rule of thumb will sit and argue the point going, "I know it is a rule... hold on I'll find it... I know it says it somewhere. It's the rules, everyone says so." :)

DeathlessDraich
05-11-2011, 19:53
Wounded Champion + Wounded RnF model last one in the unit other than the Champ, say Ogres. Both have 1 wound remaining. RnF model is hit with a Multi-wound weapon which does 5 wounds. Wounds are capped at 3 so unit takes 3 wounds. RnF model dies from 1 and the Champ from the other because once all the RnF models are gone any additional wounds to the unit go to the Champ.

2 models die from one hit.

Not sure what you're saying here. I get 1 model slain. :)

1) Unit with a Champion and 1 Ogre each with 1 wound

2) Unit suffers a single hit followed by a successful roll to wound. Armour saves fail. D6 roll yields 5 wounds from that 1 hit and 1
successful wound.

3) By pg 45 - the RnF Ogre is slain because it loses its last wound and the 2 remaining 'wounds' are 'wasted'.

pg 93 - "wounds inflicted can overflow onto the champion"

N.B. 'can' Not 'must'. i.e. there are circumstances where it will and circumstances where it might not.

Under what circumstances 'can' it overflow is given in the same paragraph just before "wounds inflicted can overflow etc"

Here it is
"a unit of 3 models suffer 3 or more unsaved wounds, the champion is removed"

i) Clearly this refers to single wound models not multi-wound models
ii) The phrase unsaved wounds appear on pg 45 as "wound that is not saved" and refers to the stage immediately after the Armour saves stage but before the D6 multi-wound stage.

Therefore the paragraph on pg 93 is referring to the unsaved wounds (1 in the example you cited) and Not the multiplied wounds (5 in the example above).

Therefore 1 model is slain only and the 2 wounds (multiplied wounds) are wasted according to the rules or 4 wounds wasted effectively.

On the 1 Hit -> 1 slain max issue:
Yes, the phrase 1 casualty from one hit does not appear but it is logically implicit from pg 45.

castlesmadeofsand
05-11-2011, 23:01
Wounded Champion + Wounded RnF model last one in the unit other than the Champ, say Ogres. Both have 1 wound remaining. RnF model is hit with a Multi-wound weapon which does 5 wounds. Wounds are capped at 3 so unit takes 3 wounds. RnF model dies from 1 and the Champ from the other because once all the RnF models are gone any additional wounds to the unit go to the Champ.

2 models die from one hit.


what weapon? it really depends what weapon your talking about and you haven't given an example.

the rule [multiple wounds] is there to make damage meaningful against multiple wound targets whilst not doing op damage to whole units. it's pretty clear in that you only multiply the wounds once a model is wounded, hence you really shouldn't be able to carry them over onto models you haven't wounded in the first place.

Mercules
06-11-2011, 01:25
what weapon? it really depends what weapon your talking about and you haven't given an example.

the rule [multiple wounds] is there to make damage meaningful against multiple wound targets whilst not doing op damage to whole units. it's pretty clear in that you only multiply the wounds once a model is wounded, hence you really shouldn't be able to carry them over onto models you haven't wounded in the first place.

Weapon does not matter. Yes, you do carry them over to models you haven't "wounded" since for one thing you don't "wound" the model in the back rank, but you do remove models in the back rank due to wounds done to the front rank.

Rank and File models do not have their own wounds. You target a rank and file model in close combat determine how many wounds were done to the unit, make saves as needed, and then remove as many whole models as possible. Simple and easy.

Mercules
06-11-2011, 01:42
Therefore 1 model is slain only and the 2 wounds (multiplied wounds) are wasted according to the rules or 4 wounds wasted effectively.

Nope....

Pg. 45

Add up all wounds cause on the unit and then remove the appropriate number of models, noting any spare wounds on the unit.

Is the Champion part of the unit? Yes.
Do we remove him if there are enough wounds done to the unit? Yes.

What you are saying is so wrong. You are saying that if in Close combat there was 1 Ogre Rank and File and a champion Ogre in the unit, if you aimed three attacks that have a x2 multiplier at the rank and file Ogre it would die and the Champ would not. No, you have done 6 wounds, enough to remove 2 models and both models in the unit get removed.

The "can" you refer to is simple language not, "In some circumstances yes but others no." It says:

...wounds inflected on the unit can overflow onto the champion, but wounds inflicted on the champion cannot overflow onto the unit. meaning they go one way, not the other not meaning there are any exceptions other than that. Reading it otherwise is purposefully misreading it.

Zoolander
07-11-2011, 21:25
You would only kill two ogres. You only hit the unit twice. You wouldn't remove 10 spearmen would you?

belgarath97
09-11-2011, 16:15
Weapon does not matter. Yes, you do carry them over to models you haven't "wounded" since for one thing you don't "wound" the model in the back rank, but you do remove models in the back rank due to wounds done to the front rank.

And this rule is called Stepping Up. And I'm pretty sure it's written that we remove models from the back for conveinence.


Rank and File models do not have their own wounds. You target a rank and file model in close combat determine how many wounds were done to the unit, make saves as needed, and then remove as many whole models as possible. Simple and easy.

If you score 1 hit with a weapon that has Multiple Wounds (d6) do you...

a. roll one Armor Save
b. roll a d6 to determine how many wounds, then roll an Armor Save for each

The correct answer is A. As such you have suffered 1 unsaved wound, which can do up to the number of wounds on the wounded model's profile.

The rule clearly says you carry over UNSAVED wounds. As you only roll one save, there is only 1 unsaved wound to carry over.

At least that is my interpretation.

Mercules
09-11-2011, 16:36
I would say that the Multiple Wounds rule overrides that. If not you are giving Ogre Champs a free ride that other Champs do not receive.

Say instead I have an Unwounded Champ on the other side of a character in a challenge from a RnF model.

Ch.CH.RF

Another character with a Multi-wound weapon hits the RnF model twice with a 1d3 weapon. The RnF model takes both wounds does not save either of them. They are now both applied to the RnF model. At that point it is not dead. Now you roll to determine how many wounds happen. It takes 3 and 2. These would kill it but according to you none go to the Champion. However, according to the rules for Multi-wound those wounds have to carry over to the rest of the unit... which is the Champion. So which rule do you want to break? :)

belgarath97
09-11-2011, 16:55
I would say that the Multiple Wounds rule overrides that. If not you are giving Ogre Champs a free ride that other Champs do not receive.

Say instead I have an Unwounded Champ on the other side of a character in a challenge from a RnF model.

Ch.CH.RF

Another character with a Multi-wound weapon hits the RnF model twice with a 1d3 weapon. The RnF model takes both wounds does not save either of them. They are now both applied to the RnF model. At that point it is not dead. Now you roll to determine how many wounds happen. It takes 3 and 2. These would kill it but according to you none go to the Champion. However, according to the rules for Multi-wound those wounds have to carry over to the rest of the unit... which is the Champion. So which rule do you want to break? :)

If you were answering me, no I'm not. My example was very specific to 1 unsaved wound. In your example there are 2, as such the first is multiplied in 3 wounds, killing the Ogre or other mulitwound RnF, the second is carried over to the Champion as 2 wounds.

To better clairfy, if I had a unit of 10 single wounds models. You do 3 hits with a multiple wounds (d3) weapon. I fail to save any. In my mind, only three models may possibly die, as there have only been 3 unsaved wounds. Even if you rolled a 3,3,2 totaling 8 wounds, you only can kill 3.

Using that logic it seems farfetched to say that if I have 2 Ogres 1 a champion both with 1 wound remaining, and you hit me once with the same weapon, and I fail to save, that you can kill the Champion by rolling 2 wounds. It still was only 1 unsaved wound.

My logic for this is based in my previous post.

Mercules
09-11-2011, 18:38
Ignore single wound models. They don't even come into play as we are not talking about rules for them. End of story. That is the flaw in your logic.

Are the multiple wounds done to a RnF Ogre saved or unsaved? They are unsaved. Think of it this way....

You roll to hit, you roll to wound, you rolls saves... at this point the wounds are "unsaved" you then multiply that "unsaved wound" into 3 wounds. Are these wounds now "saved" wounds? No... they are still "unsaved wounds" and thus carry over to other multi-wound models per the Multiple Wound Weapons and Multi-wound Model rules.

belgarath97
09-11-2011, 23:51
Ignore single wound models. They don't even come into play as we are not talking about rules for them. End of story. That is the flaw in your logic.

Are the multiple wounds done to a RnF Ogre saved or unsaved? They are unsaved. Think of it this way....

You roll to hit, you roll to wound, you rolls saves... at this point the wounds are "unsaved" you then multiply that "unsaved wound" into 3 wounds. Are these wounds now "saved" wounds? No... they are still "unsaved wounds" and thus carry over to other multi-wound models per the Multiple Wound Weapons and Multi-wound Model rules.

They are not saved or unsaved, you never roll to save for them.

Just to make sure I understand your point, if I hit 2 hits, that you fail to save, and they are from a d6 wound weapon. If I roll 2 6's I would kill four fully healed ogres?

If you answer yes, I think that is wrong, on more that a rules as written basis. It just feels wrong, 2 hits should never kill 4 models. Expontially this gets worse, give is it a character with 5 attacks, if he hits with all of them, and you save none, and the dice gods go crazy he could do 30 wounds, killing 10 ogres? Does that seem right to you?

Mercules
10-11-2011, 02:19
They are not saved or unsaved, you never roll to save for them.

Just to make sure I understand your point, if I hit 2 hits, that you fail to save, and they are from a d6 wound weapon. If I roll 2 6's I would kill four fully healed ogres?

If you answer yes, I think that is wrong, on more that a rules as written basis. It just feels wrong, 2 hits should never kill 4 models. Expontially this gets worse, give is it a character with 5 attacks, if he hits with all of them, and you save none, and the dice gods go crazy he could do 30 wounds, killing 10 ogres? Does that seem right to you?

Don't be stupid, go back and read my posts. The rules I have referenced MULTIPLE times and that I think you might be refusing to go read clearly state that when hit with a Multi-Wound weapon the wounds done cap at the Wound profile of the Multi-Wound model. However, if you do three hits with a multi-wound weapon to a Multi-Wound model you can do up to it's Wound Profile with all three hits and all those wounds are applied to the unit removing as many whole models as needed and then noting any wounds that carry over ON THE UNIT. The unit takes the wounds and you simply remove models whenever you cross the threshold.

Example, a x2 wounding weapon on a Scarvet who hits and wounds with all of his 4 attacks. He can do 8 wounds to the unit which will remove 2 models and the last 2 wounds go to the unit so once that unit suffers an additional wound another model is removed... even if this is the Champion... even if none of those were aimed at the champion.


In addition wounds don't magically lose their unsaved status when you multiply them. They are past any shot of saving them and thus are still "unsaved" Turning the 1 unsaved into X unsaved doesn't remove the fact that those wounds were NOT SAVED.

oldWitheredCorpse
10-11-2011, 07:22
Ignore single wound models. They don't even come into play as we are not talking about rules for them. End of story. That is the flaw in your logic.

Are the multiple wounds done to a RnF Ogre saved or unsaved? They are unsaved. Think of it this way....

You roll to hit, you roll to wound, you rolls saves... at this point the wounds are "unsaved" you then multiply that "unsaved wound" into 3 wounds. Are these wounds now "saved" wounds? No... they are still "unsaved wounds" and thus carry over to other multi-wound models per the Multiple Wound Weapons and Multi-wound Model rules.

You are going off deep in the wrong end. Here's what you do: if you attack rank and file you are not attacking individual models. As long as there is rank and file left to kill all hits carry through. The number of wounds on a rank and file model is only used as a cap for the multiwound rule, you don't keep track of individual wounds on rank-and-file models. So it doesn't matter if you first score 2 wounds and then 3, or first 3 and then 2. Rank-file have a "wound pool", so that in the end of a phase you have a bunch of unharmed guys, 0-1 wounded guy, the rest are dead.

If the attacking player chooses to attack rank-and-file, the hits are resolved against the wound-pool, and they don't run out of targets until all rank-and-file models are dead. On the other hand, if they do run out, the wounds do not spill over in any way ever to champions and characters. In close combat, you have to allocate hits on them. The attacking player cannot roll to hit, then roll to wound and then decide that "that or that wound" is allocated to a character or a champion. This has to be done before the To-Hit roll. That can lead to them scoring a huge number of wounds that will be discounted, it's a part of the game mechanic.

T10
10-11-2011, 09:20
To better clairfy, if I had a unit of 10 single wounds models. You do 3 hits with a multiple wounds (d3) weapon. I fail to save any. In my mind, only three models may possibly die, as there have only been 3 unsaved wounds. Even if you rolled a 3,3,2 totaling 8 wounds, you only can kill 3.


That is correct: The wounds caused against single-wound models are capped at 1. This means you can usually forgo rolling multiple wounds since these also cause a minimum of 1 wound.

If you rolled 3,3,2 this would be capped at 1,1,1: Three wounds total.


Using that logic it seems farfetched to say that if I have 2 Ogres 1 a champion both with 1 wound remaining, and you hit me once with the same weapon, and I fail to save, that you can kill the Champion by rolling 2 wounds. It still was only 1 unsaved wound.


What-ever logic you have found here does not actually apply when applying damage. If the rank-and-file suffers more wounds than they have remaining then the excess is applied to the champion. That's how it works - the number of hits isn't really an issue at this point, just the total number of wounds.

Notice that this only kills the Champion with a "free hit" if the champion has already taken at least one wound.

Imagine, if you will, that your Ogre unit of two rank-and-file and a champion are at full health. The unit first suffers a shooting hit allocated to the rank-and-file and takes a wound. The unit is then hit by a template weapon with the Multiple Wounds (D3). The champion takes 2 wounds, but the hits resolved against the rank-and-file causes 3 wounds each.

These 6 wounds are applied to the rank-and file ogres, but since they have already taken damage it means that there is one excess wound that is applied to the champion. This kills the champion.

End result: The unit has taken four hits (counting the initial 1 wound shooting hit), has suffered 9 wounds and has lost three models.

In the end, it all adds up.

-T10

theshoveller
10-11-2011, 09:46
I am hopeful-!
The doomrocket should at least have a reload-who would not carry extra ammo for such a weapon-??
...because it's Warhammer's version of something like this (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M72_LAW), which can't be reloaded. Simple.

belgarath97
11-11-2011, 15:01
Don't be stupid

Wow, and here I thought we could have a discussion without name calling.

When someone says:


Just to make sure I understand your point

They are not being stupid they want to make sure that understand the other party.


For the record, having reread the appropriate rules, I agree with you. But have little respect for you, as you couldn't even bother to act properly. Just because you have the anonymity of the internet, and you happen to be right, doesn't mean you should ignore the proper way to treat people.

I hope we never debate again.

Mercules
11-11-2011, 22:03
Wow, and here I thought we could have a discussion without name calling.

When someone says:



They are not being stupid they want to make sure that understand the other party.


For the record, having reread the appropriate rules, I agree with you. But have little respect for you, as you couldn't even bother to act properly. Just because you have the anonymity of the internet, and you happen to be right, doesn't mean you should ignore the proper way to treat people.

I hope we never debate again.

If you have been reading the discussion from the beginning and reading the rules in question and read the time I referenced the page and the rule and the time I corrected someone about applying multiple wounds to models with multiple wounds and capping that, you wouldn't have asked if my position was that "2 hits doing 6 wounds would remove 4 ogres". That was a "stupid" representation of my position and I took it as a deliberate oversimplification and obfuscation of the point as well as ingenuous.

As it now seems it wasn't I apologize. Perhaps I should have said, "No, that would be a stupid argument." As it stands I probably would have used the same wording face to face as on the internet as I don't hide behind anonymity. In fact if you wish my name and phone number I'll PM them to you and we can discuss that issue.