Math hammer calculator

I'm not sure if this has been done, at least I haven't seen one for our faction, but if I were to make a math hammer calculator in excel or google excel what type of output or features would ppl like in it?

I was thinking of having an output similar to: (x.xxx are place holders because I have calculated them)
T10+: 9 shots, 6 hit, 1 wounds, 0.833 unsaved, 1.666 damage
T6-9: 9 shots, 6 hit, 2 wounds, 1.666 unsaved, 3.333 damage
T5: 9 shots, 6 hit, 3 wounds, x.xxx unsaved, x.xxx damage
T1-4: 9 shots, 6 hit, 2 wounds, x.xxx unsaved, x.xxx damage

So this would have the shots of a ravager number of disintegrators against a variable toughness unit. And states the unsaved hits (number of wounding shots, useful against single wound creatures. And damage for multi wound creatures)

I expect to have our weapons as drop down system and the you enter the number of the weapon you are using on one side, and on the other have a unit toughness and save. To allow for the above type of output.
Other options might be the gun vs various targets rather than just variable toughness as this probably makes more sense.

Please note that due to both forum rules and copyright I will not be able to display actual stats for items, only their resulting calculations. (Mods if I have this wrong please correct me and I will alter as necessary)

At this point I open the floor. Does this sound useful? Are there other features I could add that would make it more effective, useful or get to the root of the test more?

Sounds really useful. It would be amazing if you could model each weapon with dropdown menus for the score needed to hit (to take into account any modifiers that may apply), different Toughness scores and the save of the target. If you can add in re-roll 1's, re-roll to hit, re-roll to wound that would be utterly brilliant.

I keep wishing I could do this myself but my Excel skills are not up to the task!

As above, but also add in modifers to saves (cover, etc) and "ignore wound" roils.

I'd also add damage ranges to the result. Not only average damage caused, but minimum and maximum damage based on the weapon's Damage statistic. Averages are nice, but consistency is another issue to consider when choosing tools.

I should be able to build in those suggestions, although I'm a little bit unsure of how to get the system working with wound roll saving due to las cannons and other multi wound weapons, but I will see what I can do.

On the min and maximums, I could state the min and max as I will have that info available, but I will see if there is something else I. Plus add like standard deviation or some such. Not sure yet what I will be able to manage with excel as it isn't a tool that likes multiple pathway probability (probability trees).

I'm building the calculator at the moment, and have got most of the functionality in, next will come usability, then Beta testing. But I've just remembered that GW have done somehting very odd with their modifiers and Re-rolls in this edition. Could someone run me through the correct steps for how to handle lets say:
Marine shooting at a mandrake with in a reroll to hit bubble?

I naturally (and implemented it this way currently) did the roll, applied the modifier, Worked out if it hit, if not [re-rolled, applied the modifier, worked out if it hit], move on to to wound rolls.
Now I believe this is wrong from what I've heard, but I'd really confirmation.

PS: Sorry for the double post buy my last one was 4 days old

True,

You first roll to hit, apply any rerolls.
Then apply the modifier and work out if it hit.

So in my example the following outcomes could occur:
Marine rolls a 4, no need to reroll. Subtract 1. Marine hits.
Marine rolls a 2, misses. rerolls and gets a 5. Subtract 1 hit.
Marine rolls a 3, no need to reroll. Subtract 1. Marine misses.

Are these states correct?

If so, that is just plain confusing. Why GW? Why!

You are right. It was even adressed in FAQ and stated correct.
Confusing but not difficult to handle at the table. Its worse in excel...

It was FAQ'ed as correct?!?!?!

If this were an online shooter, this is the point I would rage quit

Apparently re-roll 1 guys would treat a -1 to hit debuff as a buff ( now rerolling 1s and 2s ) if it was done the logical way.

So make effects that trigger on a 1 (or 6) only trigger on a natural 1 (or 6). Solves that problem a damn sight better than this ridiculous method!

Count Adhemar wrote:

So make effects that trigger on a 1 (or 6) only trigger on a natural 1 (or 6). Solves that problem a damn sight better than this ridiculous method!

Better, but even that feels like band aiding together a flimsy set of rules.

GW probably wants to keep the wording as simple as possible for the kiddies, but a slight tweak could solve the issues fairly easily.
For instance, they can change the wording, so that rolling higher than your BS is called a "success" instead of a "hit".
Usually 1 success translates to 1 hit on the target, but:
If we change the "-1 to hit" rule wording to be "you need to roll 1 higher than your BS to get a success VS this target" this will not interfere with re-rolling 1s, but you still re-roll "non success rolls.

OR maybe the stronger version "All success rolls needs to be 1 higher than your BS to be translated into hits VS the target." This will work the same as -1 to hit does now.

PS: Looking forward to the Math_hammer.XLSX.

A closed beta is now underway, which if anyone is interested being involved in please pm me.
Currently the file is only readable in excel, however I'm looking at moving that across to google sheets to flexibility.