The application of this is both mathematically sound and mathematically inconsistent at the same time. The chance to get a Critical Effect is the same regardless of the roll, Attribute over 20 excepted, a steady 5%. That's the mathematically sound part. The mathematically unsound part is that while the chance to get a Critical Effect remains the same, the chance for the Roll to be a Critical Effect improves. If the Roll succeeds on a 20 or less, that chance is 5%, if it's 10 or lower, then it's 10%, and if it's 1, then it's 100%. The issue comes with the lower end and the increased chance of the successful Roll being a Critical Effect. I'll make an extreme example to explain the reason this is bad. An Ariadna player has done what they wanted to do with their Orders and still has a few left over, so they use their Tractor Muls to get a Speculative Attack against a model within 8" of. Due to stacking modifiers, they have a total of -9 to their attack. This reduces their BS to 1, and if they hit, it'll be a Critical Effect. The target can try to Dodge the hit and'll have to roll another critical effect to cancel it, and while the chance to get a Critical Effect remains the same, the chance of their roll becoming a Critical Effect will be lower. The problem is that the possibility of the Critical Effect appearing is inversely proportional to the range that one has to roll, meaning that if the player is in a position where they might as well, they can only benefit from it. What I would like to see is if the Range of the roll was only 5 or less, then one would be unable to get a Critical Effect, to counter this mathematical inverse proportionality. As a side effect, it would increase the tactical aspect of positioning and proper force application.
The point of crits as they are is for the sake of tension and drama. I think we've all had this moment: My only chance is to roll a 1 for a crit. *Rolls dice, a one shows, the whole table roars with glee* You're mathing out one of the elements of joy in the game.
While your argument is sound, a player still has a 5% chance of rolling a 1. 1 out of 20 is 5%, which is a very tiny probability of success. Having such a tiny chance of success should allow a player a littile reward. In the older version, N2, crits were auto kills. This was not fun. Making an extra ARM or BTS roll allows for more probability of success for the opponent (or oneself). I think your argument for the crit mechanic is unnecessary. The game is fine.
No, the chance to roll a critical hit is the same 5%. The ratio between critical success and normal success is what increasing.
The issue is that the drama decreases the more likely something becomes. If a success can only result in a Critical Effect, then there's no drama in it; the only thing that there can be drama in is whether the Critical Effect is instituted. If I can only succeed on a 1 there there's no drama in whether it might be a Critical Effect as it's guaranteed to be a Critical Effect if the Roll succeeds. I know what it was, and in these cases, it's no better since your only chance of protection against it is to roll another Critical Effect. You still have to take an extra Saving Roll, and if you're a 1 VITA infantry, then there's little practical difference between taking two Saving Rolls or just taking a wound, other than the model's chance of flying is higher if it fails both Saving Rolls rather than just taking a wound automatically. The change is a benefit to more expensive and well-protected models and a downgrade for lighter models. It would be equal if the Critical Effect were just an unbeatable success (aside from another Critical Effect) and nothing else. Rolling a Critical Effect and the result becoming Critical Effect are two different things. If I need to roll a 1 to hit, then I only have a 5% chance of doing so. If I roll that 1, then the result will result in a Critical Effect 100% of the time. Likewise, if I need to roll a 2, then I can hit on a 1 and get a Critical Effect on a 2. I still only have a 5% chance to roll a crit, and if I do, then the result of my roll has a 50% chance of becoming a Critical Effect, as I'll either roll the 1 (normal effect) or the 2 (Critical Effect). There needs to be some protection againstthe low result. Steel manning Quantronic Wombart's argument that Critical effects are for the drama and excitement, there's no drama or excitement, the lower the roll is as it increases the chance of the result being a Critical Effect. This is a thing that favours the "Might as well" mentality that people will sometimes find themselves in. If people either have no realistic chance, no matter what they do, or they have a surplus of Orders, then "Might as well" is an extremely easy choice since the person can only really profit if it happens and loses nothing they were unprepared to lose.
