[Resource] Tau 8th ed. Mathammer Tables

A collection of the best of the ATT Academy, edited and maintained by our staff and supporting members.
User avatar
AenarIT
Shas'Ui
Shas'Ui
Posts: 55

[Resource] Tau 8th ed. Mathammer Tables

Post#1 » Jun 06 2017 10:59

Hello everyone!

I worked on a basic mathammer (non-stathammer) Excel sheet to calculate what unit loadouts are better, from a point-per-(unsaved)wound (PPW) perspective, against the whole range of possible enemies.

I compared a lot of possible loadouts for the most common Tau units.

Several disclaimers and assumptions I did:
- The 3 tables differ in how many Markerlight hits are assumed on the target and on whether the Stormsurge used its Destroyer Missiles or not.
- The additional loadouts for the big suits does not appear on the first column but it has been considered for both the cost and the wound inflicted. The respective weapons used were: Stormsurge and Ghostkeel (2 Burst Cannons), Riptide and Broadside (2 Smart Missile System).
- The Stormsurge is considered anchored (BS 3+).
- You should be able to understand what units are considered as target in each column. I abbreviated them in some weird ways, I know, but their profile is included.
- I considered Toughness, Armor Save, Invulnerable Save and Feel No Pain (or whatever it is called now).

I manually checked some calculations to be sure, and I did not find any mistakes. That does not mean that it is 100% correct.

tl;dr: green is good, red is bad.

Anyway, here are the 6 tables (WARNING, big images):
Points per wounds (PPW): http://imgur.com/a/Vusl4
Wounds inflicted: http://imgur.com/a/k31ho

I would gladly upload them here, but they get resized to a point where they are unreadable.
The Excel sheet itself is quite a mess at the moment, I can pass it to anyone interested but I advise against it (you'll probably go crazy trying to understand me).

Anyway, I think it is a good starting point to discuss point efficiency of new Tau in 8th edition.

Go in peace and spread the Greater Good! :D

EDIT: So far I planned on adding:
- Vespids
- Skyray
- Coldstar Commander added
- 2x/3x/... units of Drones/FW with the Fireblade/Drone Controller buff added
- non-ATS Railgun Broadside added
- Stealth Suits
- ...?
- melee units (Kroots, Kroot Hounds, ...)

EDIT (v.1.01): Added a few units (see above), corrected a few mistakes (Hammerheads are not so bad now), integrated the D-missiles in the same tables and added 3 tables for the Wounds inflicted.
I also updated the formula to manage the Quantum Shielding for the Necron Ghost Ark.
I removed the Stealth Suits and the Ghostkeel from the target units, maybe I'll add them again but they are identical (minus the penalty to hit) to some units already present.
Last edited by AenarIT on Jun 12 2017 10:31, edited 5 times in total.

User avatar
Aldarion
Shas'La
Shas'La
Posts: 69
Contact:

Re: Tau 8th ed. mathammer tables

Post#2 » Jun 06 2017 12:34

:eek: Wooo, this is cool,
a good reference for helping us wit our armys.

Thanks!
Training in clonetrooper training center BS3!, ja!

User avatar
Iron-Fist
Shas'Ui
Shas'Ui
Posts: 325

Re: Tau 8th ed. mathammer tables

Post#3 » Jun 06 2017 01:40

Can you add a column for coldstar commander +/- ATS?
Augmented Puretide Council
The Tau Deathstar 2015: 8-1

User avatar
AenarIT
Shas'Ui
Shas'Ui
Posts: 55

Re: Tau 8th ed. mathammer tables

Post#4 » Jun 06 2017 02:08

Iron-Fist wrote:Can you add a column for coldstar commander +/- ATS?

I will do it, probably I'll dedicate it a bit more time during the weekend.

So far I planned on adding:
- Vespids
- Skyray
- Coldstar Commander
- 2x/3x/... units of Drones/FW with the Fireblade/Drone Controller buff
- non-ATS Railgun Broadside
- ...?
- melee units (Kroots, Kroot Hounds, ...)

Feel free to suggest anything that might come useful. I'd skip the Sun Shark Bomber, since his efficiency relies on bombing and I'm not inclined to suppose an avg target unit size for it. It would skew the data A LOT.
As soon as the FW Index come out, I'll add some units from there as well.
Last edited by AenarIT on Jun 12 2017 03:45, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
nic
Kroot'La
Kroot'La
Posts: 807

Re: Tau 8th ed. mathammer tables

Post#5 » Jun 06 2017 02:13

Excellent idea.

Just so I can understand that how did you account for buffs other than Markerlights?

For example you show a Cadre Fireblade on one of the Drone rows, how many drones did you assume per Fireblade? Also could we have a row for Drones with a Drone controller nearby, you certainly want that if you intend to use Drones as the core of your firebase.

User avatar
AenarIT
Shas'Ui
Shas'Ui
Posts: 55

Re: Tau 8th ed. mathammer tables

Post#6 » Jun 06 2017 02:22

nic wrote:Excellent idea.

Just so I can understand that how did you account for buffs other than Markerlights?

For example you show a Cadre Fireblade on one of the Drone rows, how many drones did you assume per Fireblade? Also could we have a row for Drones with a Drone controller nearby, you certainly want that if you intend to use Drones as the core of your firebase.


I assumed one unit of 10, for both the Fire Warriors and the Drones, and one Cadre Fireblade. Adding another entry for 20 FW/Drones is an option, of course.

User avatar
MKJump
Shas'Saal
Posts: 107

Re: Tau 8th ed. mathammer tables

Post#7 » Jun 06 2017 07:47

The news for Crisis Battlesuits keeps getting better and better. :roll: Beats the talk from last week. CIBs are looking like our staple choice, shame they're one per Commander Kit; plasma looks like a solid deepstriking option because it faired well when in rapid fire range; and FBs seem as specialised as they've always been and out perform everything when shooting the right thing.

User avatar
555ea
Shas'Saal
Posts: 35

Re: Tau 8th ed. mathammer tables

Post#8 » Jun 11 2017 05:31

AenarIT wrote:
Iron-Fist wrote:Can you add a column for coldstar commander +/- ATS?

I will do it, probably I'll dedicate it a bit more time during the weekend.

So far I planned on adding:
- Vespids
- Skyray
- Coldstar Commander
- 2x/3x/... units of Drones/FW with the Fireblade/Drone Controller buff
- ...?

Feel free to suggest anything that might come useful. I'd skip the Sun Shark Bomber, since his efficiency relies on bombing and I'm not inclined to suppose an avg target unit size for it. It would skew the data A LOT.
As soon as the FW Index come out, I'll add some units from there as well.


Any updates yet? I find your tables really useful, since it's just so easy to compare "3 crisis with Mpods to Misslelsides" and etc. It's so effective, that it might be replaced by web app of some sort, where we can input any unit with any loadout and bonuses like markerlights, kayoun againts any target. :eek:

User avatar
Atzilla
Shas'Saal
Posts: 87

Re: Tau 8th ed. mathammer tables

Post#9 » Jun 11 2017 06:06

AenarIT wrote:Anyway, here are the 6 tables (WARNING, big images):

http://imgur.com/a/6sw2l

I would gladly upload them here, but they get resized to a point where they are unreadable.
The Excel sheet itself is quite a mess at the moment, I can pass it to anyone interested but I advise against it (you'll probably go crazy trying to understand me).

Anyway, I think it is a good starting point to discuss point efficiency of new Tau in 8th edition.



You did an awesome work here!

I made a similar table myself (only weapon vs Targets, Points not considered) and the formula was crazy already.

One thing, I caught you making the same simplification as I did. :D

For Example
4 FB Commander VS T4 Sv2+ W3

An FB does an average damage of 3.5 (D6) we both capped this to 3 (because of 3W).
In reality the average damage will be 2.5 (Possible outcomes of D6: 1, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3 =15; 15/6 =2,5)

This changes his PPUWI from 23 to 29.
Something to keep in mind with random damage weapons vs targets with W>1 and W<(max dice roll)


Also, it could be interesting to divide base model cost (without weapons) by 2, roughly assuming that the value of a model is half offense and half defense. Maybe we can have another table for this?

User avatar
AenarIT
Shas'Ui
Shas'Ui
Posts: 55

Re: Tau 8th ed. mathammer tables

Post#10 » Jun 11 2017 08:54

Sorry but I had a busy week (and busier weekend), I'll try to update them in the next few days.
I am happy that someone finds them useful, it certainly motivates me to continue working on them :P

As for the 3W example, you are right. I'll try to find a way to take it into account.
I would probably try to prepare a separate defensive mathammer table, to calculate how many shots are required to wipe out one of our units.

Check this thread once in a while ;)

Obeisance79
Shas'Saal
Posts: 2

Re: Tau 8th ed. mathammer tables

Post#11 » Jun 11 2017 09:12

Seriously great work on these tables.

User avatar
Atzilla
Shas'Saal
Posts: 87

Re: Tau 8th ed. mathammer tables

Post#12 » Jun 11 2017 10:10

AenarIT wrote:Check this thread once in a while ;)


Will do!

User avatar
A'ran Kais
Shas'Saal
Posts: 7

Re: Tau 8th ed. mathammer tables

Post#13 » Jun 11 2017 11:01

yes I totally agree, great work!

However we should try to figure out when looking at your amazing table that other factors are to be considered evaluating a unit. For example durability, effectiveness (Fly units keep firing even if assaulted, while other not [apart from darkstrider]).

While an excellent tool to evaluate efficacy versus various targets, we can't rely on it for the overall evaluation (my opinion).

By the way thank you, absolutely amazing! :)

ProfessorGatekeeper
Shas'Saal
Posts: 3

Re: Tau 8th ed. mathammer tables

Post#14 » Jun 11 2017 11:37

You magnificent mathematician! I would love a copy of that fabulous table so I can play with it in ways that may only be described as unnatural and unorthodox! Thumbs up all the way.

User avatar
boomwolf
Shas'La
Shas'La
Posts: 1769

Re: Tau 8th ed. mathammer tables

Post#15 » Jun 11 2017 02:09

The implications of the table so far are...disturbing.

First, it cements my opinion of the crisis being inferior. the commander outperforms even at 5 ML? that, I did not expect. I was sure that at 5 it will tilt over to the crisis, giving them some shred of hope.
The go-to commander setup seems to be tri-CIB, not too surprising given that CIB was the go-to gun in 7th as well. the combination of decent range for effect, versatility of two profiles are raw stopping power really sells it off.
I thought quad-plasma may rise to challenge it, but seems like I was wrong.
Quad fusion, as expected, is making short work out of the heaviest opponents and rather pointless against lighter ones. not sure I'd bother, given how flexible and effective the tri-CIB build is.


The fire warriors seems to be lagging behind gun drones more than I expected, they would have been the obvious superior choice due to the gun preformance and durability, if not for FW's superior leadership and the ability to threaten range.


The hammerheads...saddens me.
They are weak, even in ideal circumstances, even against the target of choice they just don't bring results. even longstirke himself, against all but the heaviest targets, is not viable. and its not like we can grantee having these on the other side.
Guess I'm still stuck with no reason to field my armored battalion (I have 5 tanks. 5. what on earth will I do with them!?)

Same goes for riptides. can't seem to justify them when they don't even have a target the excel at shooting at. they can take a serious beating-but then what?

The ghost has slight saving graces in being effective against the right target the a dedicated build, but with the tri-cib commander around, I can't see him compete that well. maybe had it been a raw fusion suit it could function as a heavy hitter?

Broadsides still showing heavy favoritism for HYMP over rails. not too surprised, but I hoped that rail would find a niche.
I would want to see the non-ATS railside. maybe if the results are not too far off, the mere opportunity to mount another system on it (like a shield gen) would be worth it.


The stormsurge seems slightly dependant on the missiles. a shame, never liked the concept of depleteable ammo-but it seems like a solid choice in either variation.
I'd probably opt for the PDC, the results are close enough that the ability to anchor in freely with it's superior range for added BS will probably be worth it. could be wrong though.



Pathfinder rail rifles is probably faulty, you'd expect to double the effectiveness at rapid fire, but it does not.


As for stormsurge/riptide/ghost profiles, can you perhaps add other configurations to them? maybe wel'' manage to find a decent configuration for the ghost and tide.

User avatar
AnonAmbientLight
Shas'La
Shas'La
Posts: 866

Re: Tau 8th ed. mathammer tables

Post#16 » Jun 12 2017 12:26

Not really. The table gives you a vague idea of what to expect on weapons shooting in a vacuum, even with markerlights it doesn't tell the whole picture.

The graph also assumes points spent on attacking units, but not on what the unit brings and the possible survivability it has. It also doesn't take into consideration all the buffs units can get, such as Longstrike giving his +1 to hit buff to other Hammerheads.

Again, graphs are useful for getting a general feel of how good weapons are against particular units. This helps you to see your odds against certain targets with certain weapons.

It isn't really a good indicator of what is good to field because mathhammer simply cannot account for the many layers the game has.
Sky IS Falling, T'au WILL Suck, Sell Me Your Models

User avatar
AenarIT
Shas'Ui
Shas'Ui
Posts: 55

Re: Tau 8th ed. mathammer tables

Post#17 » Jun 12 2017 03:44

AnonAmbientLight wrote:Not really. The table gives you a vague idea of what to expect on weapons shooting in a vacuum, even with markerlights it doesn't tell the whole picture.

The graph also assumes points spent on attacking units, but not on what the unit brings and the possible survivability it has. It also doesn't take into consideration all the buffs units can get, such as Longstrike giving his +1 to hit buff to other Hammerheads.

Again, graphs are useful for getting a general feel of how good weapons are against particular units. This helps you to see your odds against certain targets with certain weapons.

It isn't really a good indicator of what is good to field because mathhammer simply cannot account for the many layers the game has.


I took into account the BS bonus given to HH by Longstrike (you find 3 HH profiles: HH, HH BS2+ and Longstrike HH).

As for the other suggestions: I chose the loadouts for the bigger suits by mathammering the various weapons and considering which would be better given its range. For example, both for the Ghostkeel and the Stormusrge the flamers are good, but their short range makes them quite useless in various occasions.
I'll release the mathammering for the single weapons and the expected unsaved wounds per turn.

The ATS is not so useful on a railside, I agree. I'll add a non-ATS railside profile.

I double checked the Pathfinder Rail Rifle calculation and they are correct. They nearly double their effectiveness, not perfectly because you have to take into account the base cost for the Pathfinders themselves.

User avatar
Atzilla
Shas'Saal
Posts: 87

Re: Tau 8th ed. mathammer tables

Post#18 » Jun 12 2017 03:53

AenarIT wrote:I double checked the Pathfinder Rail Rifle calculation and they are correct. They nearly double their effectiveness, not perfectly because you have to take into account the base cost for the Pathfinders themselves.


This can't be.
In RapidFire, Wounds Inflicted should double, price should stay the same. So PPW should be halfed. (see ion rifle)
Something funky going on with their mortal wounds calculation maybe?

AenarIT wrote:The ATS is not so useful on a railside, I agree. I'll add a non-ATS railside profile.

You will be suprised, I guess its useful for the SMS alone...

Return to “The Academy Articles”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests