I'd like to start out by saying I really like Nikephoros Metric*.
But then I read this: http://thepontificateofnurglitch.blogspot.com/2011/08/warhammer-against-nikephoros-metric.html
A pretty harsh attack on it I felt, and also one with a lot of long sentances, which took a while to get around. Anyway, I commented, and then he replied, and so did I. Except that moderation on comments takes forever, so I thought i'd start a blog.
I was commenting Anonymously, so if you care, you can go and read my comments, but i'd like to post a general defence here.
Nurg seemed to have a problem with a set of data saying that the numbers at the end don't represent how you win tactically in 40k, and to this I have to say, of course they do. The proof is the Metric was built on lists that do nothing but win tactically in 40k. There are tonnes of arguments against this, different armies win in different ways and play differently with different terrain on different mission objectives against different armies all depending on how different die roll on different boards on different days depending on different rules in the differnet editions. But the scores show that, because all 4 armies had different (i'm starting to hate that word) scores in the 4 categories. It did show a few things however, all the successful armies could kill Rhinos.
The numbers aren't going to be perfect some units will get scores that are impossible (such as a unit popping more Rhinos in a game than there are turns in the game) but the bias treats all units and armies the same, and to be honest we're assuming some common sense. The numbers reflect the tactical breakdown of 40k, what you need and what you don't need. By the time we get to 8th edition who knows what'll happen, maybe Rhinos will be redundant and we'll all be packing our armies with foot-slogging troops with flamers and putting 500 points into 1 HQ in a 1,000 point game because the rules favour that.
But guess what, as the tactics change so will the numbers, flamers have higher DMS and lower DLRPG than lascannons and you can read that shift. The numbers work, it's all about how you read them and what you count as important (DRPG) and what you discount as seemingly irrelevant (the total numbers of Dead Marines after a certain point).
So what i'm trying to say is, if you don't think the metric reflects what's important in 40k I defy you to create a list with: <40 DRPG, >60 Dead Marines per Game and win in a competitive setting.
If you do that, i'll do what noone on the internet has ever done before: Accept that i'm wrong, and you're right.
*In case you haven't read it: http://nike40k.blogspot.com/2011/06/40k-theory-its-all-about-numbers.html
No comments:
Post a Comment