Move the objective from the mid-point to the middle of the opponent's DZ. Oh, hey! I can reduce my ARO ranges for objective defences Change the terrain guidelines to specify that there should be at least one fairly obscuring obstacle in the middle. Look! I can probably move or position to not directly compete with the core linked Bolt sniper Give a profile TacAware. Sure, this other unit is stronger on paper, but this TacAware unit can get around and win me games more reliably. Chain of Command. Let's calculate how likely it is that I lose my LT? Smoke. If there are no Face to Face there is no need for the calculator.
Sure there is a value in good specialists and other support troops. I’m not saying that. I’m saying that most players will use math to decide how good a trooper is. I’m pretty sure that you do too. The fact that a roll isn’t a f2f roll is great for the active player. Makes math a lot easier. This is precisely the reason why fullcore Pitcher+guidebot, impersonation and fullcore smoke grenade launcher are so popular and fullcore regular grenade launcher isn’t. I mean if grenade launcher had let’s say +3 range band (like throwable grenades) and could benefit from fireteam burst bonus… We would be complaining about grenade launchers.
Statistical calculation can be (and in fact is) a very interesting tool at a theoretical level (before starting to play), but it is rare in a game like this that theory survives contact with reality at the time to play Unless you tell me that the statistical calculation will also tell me how a unit will behave depending on the scenery density of the table in front of me when playing. I may be wrong, but I think that looking at the results of the calculation I won't know if I should deploy my Fireteam in the right, left or central part of my deployment zone; or if it is better to leave the troop on the ground or upload it to a building depending on the table that I have in front of me when playing. Undoubtedly knowing the performance statistics of a troop is something very useful and interesting, but by itself it is somewhat limited... because when playing there are many other factors that can modify that performance that are impossible to know in advance.
On the other hand statistics can tell you chances of success under any conditions, chance of taking damage, etc. If you know they only have a 2% chance of killing you but you have an 80% Chance of killing them under a certain set of modifiers you can play to set that up. So while it won't tell you how the game plays out it will help you judge units and how to use them. Unless you really think math can't tell you that taking your solo Fusiler hacker against a Tinbot Core Jazz is a bad idea. Order efficiency is huge.
Probability calculation is also very useful in finding out obvious playtesting mistakes. For example, while landing pitchers to 24” is usually a inefficient because of -3 range mod, it suddenly becomes super effective (78%) with burst3 (Bit & Kiss). If we look at how CB does balance changes (no changes to base rules, nerf Andromeda infiltration to oblivion), the easiest change would be to remove deployable repeaters from infiltrating units, remove pitchers from fireteam profiles and remove fast pandas from forward deployment units. And also remove pitcher profile from Bit & Kiss. Impersonation would be fixed by replacing all impersonation LSGs with combi rifles.
Better yet, nerf Oblivion to where it was in N3 at least, and restrict how widespread it is (former AHD profiles only).
