# Thoughts on "First Rank Fire, Second Rank Fire"



## Fallen (Oct 7, 2008)

So I was thinking about FRFSRF and how I would possibly homebrew "fix" it, not that itself is bad, but I just felt to make the idea of massed infantry fire of the Imperial Guard...I personally find that it's a little lacking.

*Note the following requires one to have excel*
**NOTE The following involves MathHammer, which we all know isn't dice**

----

*Edit: There Was an error in this document - look for the one a few posts below, it has been removed here to avoid any potential issues.*


----

In general the idea of FRFSRF is that it adds a single additional die per lasgun (or hot-shot lasgun) to the pool.

However this is simply the most inefficient way for Guardsmen to wound Space Marines or Orks, as for generic Guardsmen (which are probably the most likely to be seen using FRFSRF since blob squads). They only net a single wound against something Tough 4 once out of every ten shots**.

So going from 9 shots to 18 shots (since laspistols do not count) only nets a single additional shot at max (again with Mathhammer) and that's assuming that you do not have range to rapid fire by default OR you do not have any heavy/special weapons in the squads (Your guardsmen, of course you have these things)

I have also broken up the spreadsheet by the differing ballistic skill of the various guardsmen (conscripts @ BS2, guardsmen @ BS3, veterans @ BS4)

----

I've learned that FRFSRF as it is now, is not really as useful order, if the order was to be buffed one way or another I would simply choose for the rerolls to wound/shred (and I would just make it any las weapon, so pistols will now help more), while it is not as powerful as simply allowing las weapons to be twin-linked and/or shred.

----

In short the most effectient way to cause wounds is

1) Modify dice via Reroll to hit & reroll to wound ~ 50% wound rate)

2) Modify dice via Rerolls to hit only - shockingly this is better than only allowing rerolls to wound ~ 40% wound rate

3) Modify dice via Rerolls to Wound only ~ 20% wound rate

4)no modifiers at all ~ 10% wound rate


----------



## neferhet (Oct 24, 2012)

i can understand this. also, allowing a simple reroll would be much better for playability: more output, less dices.
that would be a nice fix.


----------



## ntaw (Jul 20, 2012)

Interesting theories on FRFSRF! It would be cool to see orders revisited in a new Codex.



Fallen said:


> In short the most efficient way to cause wounds is
> 
> 1) Modify dice via Reroll to hit & reroll to wound ~ 50% wound rate)
> 
> ...


Why did you exclude the FRFSRF effects on whatever sample squad size you've chosen for these numbers? It's cool that there's all these potentials for an increase in weapon effectiveness but it would be great to know, as simply as it's put here without staring at a spreadsheet, what the current per cent bonus for the Order is.


----------



## Fallen (Oct 7, 2008)

@ntaw I simply went from from 1-150 shots (as I think a conscript squad can be 100 models so if it got FRFSRF and was in rapid fire range it would be 150 shots.

for the percentage states I simply just choose the result for 10.

If we're going to go with 5 blob squads (so 45 guys with lasguns - lets assume that no heavy/special weapons are in to mess with numbers.) All numbers are rounded down.

45 shots, 22 hit, 7 wounds 7/45 = 16% no modifiers

45 shots, 22 hit, reroll missed to hits, total hits = 33, 18 wounds. 40% with Reroll TO HIT modifier

45 shots 22 hit, 7 wounds, reroll missed to wounds, total = 12 wounds. 12/45 =~27%

45 shots, 22 hit, reroll missed to hits, total hits = 33, 18 wounds, reroll missed to wounds, total = 23 wounds. 23/45 =~51%

----

THe simple math is

Shots (S) * 1/2 = Hits (H)

H* 1/3 = Wounds (W) (as we are targeting Orks/Space Marines here)

So in general its W = ((S*1/2)*1/3)

---

Amounts of hits with rerolls to hit is simply the the above step with with a little wrinkle added in. the below is total wounds with a reroll to wound.

H+((S-H)*(1/2))=*T*otal*H*its*w*ith*R*eroll

----

W+((H-W)*(1/3))=TWwR

----

Heres a PDF - the excel I think is a little easier to read which is why I left a link to it via dropbox (at least in theory I did)


----------



## ntaw (Jul 20, 2012)

Fallen said:


> 45 shots, 22 hit, 7 wounds 7/45 = 16% no modifiers
> 
> 45 shots, 22 hit, reroll missed to hits, total hits = 33, 18 wounds. 40% with Reroll TO HIT modifier
> 
> ...


I guess it's hard for me to understand what this all really means when it isn't compared to what you have a problem with: one extra shot for each gun with no modifiers. What's the percent to-wound of 90 unmodified shots compared to these examples you've given?


----------



## Fallen (Oct 7, 2008)

the probability to wound with 90 shots.

with no modifiers -aka just rolling to hit, then rolling to wound.

BS3 guardsmen hit 50% of the time.

90 ÷ 2 = 45

being Strength 3 vs Tough 4 requires 5's to hit - so 1/3 of a die can cause wounds.

45 hits x 1/3 = 15 wounds.

probability is 15 wounds per 90 shots = ~17% (to be precise it is 16.67%)

----

The probability varies from amount to amount and should probably be read more like "success rates" for causing a wound.

Since for Veteran Guardsmen it raises to 20 projected wounds ~22% (I'm rounding which is why I am using the tilde key "~" to express the approximation)
and lowers for conscripts to just 10 wounds, for ~11% 

----

If you would look at either the PDF (first row page 3) or excel file that I have provided for everyone, however i shall post below what the total wounds for 90 shots are as follows for BS 3 guardsmen;

Total wounds without modifiers = 15

Total wounds with rerolls to hit modifier = 37

Total wounds with rerolls to wound modifier = 25

Total wounds with rerolls to hit & to wound modifier = 47

----

The thoughts that I had when initially created this was after I was just rolling a bunch of dice with seeing the "result" from me issuing FRFSRF to my guardsmen in theory while I waited to play games/bored at home and waiting for my crap internet to connect. The second part of it was "is adding an extra shot really good? I think I might rather just be able to reroll wounds...*rolls dice*...I wonder about rerolls to hit...*more dice rolls*...maybe both?


----------



## ntaw (Jul 20, 2012)

OK so I've finally broken down and looked at your spreadsheet, which I am wholeheartedly disappointed in (looking at it, not you creating it). By your math:

90 lasgun shots (45 lasguns with FRFSRF issued): 15 wounds
those same 45 lasguns with re-rolls to-hit: 18 wounds
again with re-rolls to-wound: 12 wounds
with both re-rolls to-hit and to-wound: 23 wounds

So basically FRFSRF is better than shred in this example and worse than twin-linked. Overall re-rolling everything is best (which should be no surprise).

A most specific example for my 30 man Guard blob, which has a power axe sergeant and flamer for every 10 models, would be 24 lasguns shooting:

48 shots with FRFSRF: 8 wounds
24 shots twin-linked: 10 wounds
24 shots with shred: 6 wounds
24 shots with all the re-rolls: 12 wounds

Ah, consistency. Knowing now that FRFSRF sits pretty much exactly in between twin-linked and shred (yeah, got sick of typing re-rolls to-hit and to-wound respectively) I seriously doubt it will change with a reissue of the Codex and have no real issue with the rule the way it is. I have enjoyed this exercise though.

Do I have this way wrong? It's what I've been failing at asking for/saying the whole time.


----------



## Fallen (Oct 7, 2008)

ntaw said:


> So basically FRFSRF is better than shred in this example and worse than twin-linked. Overall re-rolling everything is best (which should be no surprise).
> 
> A most specific example for my 30 man Guard blob, which has a power axe sergeant and flamer for every 10 models, would be 24 lasguns shooting:
> 
> ...


OH that's what you were asking? I feel like an idiot now, I was so confused with your earlier line of questioning; going like "Why does he want to know about the number of shots?

----

I'll be honest because I haven't spent that much time comparing different unit strengths - I was initially way more interested in what was the effectiveness of having rerolls.

----

so for a 30man blob squad that has 24 lasguns.

34 shots - non rapid fire FRFSRF (as FRFSRF only grants 1 extra shot per gun) - 17 hits, 5.7 wounds, rounding down to 5 wounds.

58 shots - rapid fire (24 x 2 = 48 + 10 = 58) FRFSRF, 29 hits, 9 wounds

The 24 shot-hit-wound line was 4, 10, 6 and 12 wounds as you had mentioned earlier

The 48 shot-hit-wound line (aka just generic rapid fire) was 8, 20, 13, 25.

----

Hopefully that helps yourself and everyone else - I learned something new in that I can compare unit size differences; which I will admit wasn't something that I was thinking about. I was not thinking tactically about unit sizes and changing tactics that way.

----
@ntaw


> Why did you exclude the FRFSRF effects on whatever sample squad size you've chosen for these numbers? It's cool that there's all these potentials for an increase in weapon effectiveness but it would be great to know, as simply as it's put here without staring at a spreadsheet, what the current per cent bonus for the Order is.


I initially didn't "add" the effect of FRFSRF to the list was because to me it was just another number already on the sheet - if I wanted to find "Y" which was "X+10" I would just find "Y" - I didn't necessarially need to have extra rows on the spreadsheet (and do more goddamn math than needed), as I went to the max output possible of 150 (yes that would be conscripts @ bs2 rapid firing but still)


----------



## ntaw (Jul 20, 2012)

You have me befuddled my friend. Why do you think 24 lasguns is only 34 shots with FRFSRF?



> The ordered unit must make a shooting attack. When resolving this shooting attack, all models firing with lasguns or hot-shot lasguns fire one additional shot.


24 lasguns firing two shots each is 48 shots. If they were rapid firing it would be 72.


----------



## Fallen (Oct 7, 2008)

:headbutt::suicide:Ignore everything that I say right now....

:headbutt::headbutt::headbutt:

:suicide:	:suicide:	:suicide:


----------



## ntaw (Jul 20, 2012)

:laugh: I wasn't articulating myself properly either. I couldn't understand what comparison was being drawn by leaving the starting point for the whole discussion, +1 shot per lasgun, out of the examples. I wasn't expecting to see the result I did based on your initial post but sure enough if I'm interpreting your math correctly FRFSRF is straight up better than shred thanks to the weight of dice. It makes sense that twin-linked is the clear winner though, seems to be the to-hit roll is the real bottleneck for wounds generated.

Do you still feel the same way about the order? I know it's a gong show of dice but that's kinda what Guard is all about.


----------



## shaantitus (Aug 3, 2009)

I remember (this is a couple of years and an edition ago) that frfsrf was a killer in my gunline guard(traitors) games against meq. Ballpark a 50 man blob puts out 150 shots(slightly less due to sarges and special weapons) of which half will hit(75) of those a third will wound meq(25) and of those a third will fail save.(8.3) if there are special weapons in the squad(plasma I am looking at you) it becomes more effective, and you end up looking at the complete annihilation of a 10 man marine squad. Used to work pretty well for me. Personally I think frfsrf has its place and can be mighty effective. Not sure what has changed in the later edition and codexes but I plan to find out soon.


----------



## Fallen (Oct 7, 2008)

Ok, So I had to basically rewrite the entire spread sheet - since it came to my attention that without giving the sample sizes for generic rapid fire/FRFSRF and with rapid fire & FRFSRF that my argument (or theory...or whatever this is) was extremely void of information. Thanks @ntaw



----

Anyways this might be slightly redundant so forgive me if I sound boring here.

So our example shall be a 30man blob squad with sargents & special weapons being in the mix - resulting in 24 guardsmen with light guns. 

NOTE all wounds are rounded down, so some of them will not appear to differ

*Normal Shooting*

With no modifiers (strait shooting against a T4 enemy)
Total of 24 shots = 12 hits = 4 wounds

Rerolls to hit (Twin-Linked)
Total of 24 shots = 18 hits = 6 wounds

Rerolls to Wound (Shred)
Total of 24 shots = 12 hits = 6 wounds

Rerolls to hit & wound (Twin-Linked & Shred)
Total of 24 shots = 18 hits = 10 wounds

----

*Normal Shooting + Rapid Fire (or FRFSRF as it is the same effect)*

With no modifiers (strait shooting against a T4 enemy)
Total of 48 shots = 24 hits = 8 wounds

Rerolls to hit (Twin-Linked)
Total of 48 shots = 36 hits = 12 wounds

Rerolls to Wound (Shred)
Total of 48 shots = 24 hits = 13 wounds

Rerolls to hit & wound (Twin-Linked & Shred)
Total of 48 shots = 36 hits = 20 wounds

----

*Normal Shooting + Rapid Fire & FRFSRF*

With no modifiers (strait shooting against a T4 enemy)
Total of 72 shots = 36 hits = 12 wounds

Rerolls to hit (Twin-Linked)
Total of 72 shots = 54 hits = 18 wounds

Rerolls to Wound (Shred)
Total of 72 shots = 36 hits = 20 wounds

Rerolls to hit & wound (Twin-Linked & Shred)
Total of 72 shots = 54 hits = 30 wounds

----

Now what I wanted to look at was what a blob squad of 3 would look like, assuming that each squad composed of 1 sargent, 1 special weapon and 1 heavy weapon (2 guardsmen) that left 6 generic guardsmen. (as my general loadout is such for my infantry squads)

*Normal Shooting*

With no modifiers (strait shooting against a T4 enemy)
Total of 18 shots = 9 hits = 3 wounds

Rerolls to hit (Twin-Linked)
Total of 18 shots = 13 hits = 4 wounds

Rerolls to Wound (Shred)
Total of 18 shots = 9 hits = 5 wounds

Rerolls to hit & wound (Twin-Linked & Shred)
Total of 18 shots = 13 hits = 7 wounds

----

*Normal Shooting + Rapid Fire (or FRFSRF as it is the same effect)*

With no modifiers (strait shooting against a T4 enemy)
Total of 36 shots = 18 hits = 6 wounds

Rerolls to hit (Twin-Linked)
Total of 36 shots = 27 hits = 9 wounds

Rerolls to Wound (Shred)
Total of 36 shots = 18 hits = 10 wounds

Rerolls to hit & wound (Twin-Linked & Shred)
Total of 36 shots = 27 hits = 15 wounds

----

*Normal Shooting + Rapid Fire & FRFSRF*

With no modifiers (strait shooting against a T4 enemy)
Total of 54 shots = 27 hits = 9 wounds

Rerolls to hit (Twin-Linked)
Total of 54 shots = 40 hits = 13 wounds

Rerolls to Wound (Shred)
Total of 54 shots = 27 hits = 15 wounds

Rerolls to hit & wound (Twin-Linked & Shred)
Total of 54 shots = 40 hits = 22 wounds

----

So assuming that my math does not suck (I don't think that I made a mistake.) I found it interesting how with the abilty to reroll wounds is just about as good as having FRFSRF; having twin-linked is probably just as good if you are a large squad, for small squads having rerolls to wound is better.

New link to the newer excel file.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B-ds57ebgHWgYWVraENkVDB5VXM/view?usp=sharing


----------



## ntaw (Jul 20, 2012)

OK. I have to ask this before typing anything else because there's something very silly happening here.

Is the purpose of this exercise to change FRFSRF to something else or to add effects to it while still increasing the number of shots fired?


----------



## Fallen (Oct 7, 2008)

Initially it was about the possibility to change it to something else...

mainly the idea of changing the order to provide Twin-Link, Shred, or both; instead of just adding a die...



Fallen said:


> The second part of it was "is adding an extra shot really good? I think I might rather just be able to reroll wounds...*rolls dice*...I wonder about rerolls to hit...*more dice rolls*...maybe both?


----

I posted two different unit load outs of 30man blob squads, while unnecessary I did include a complete result between normal shooting (with dice modifiers), normal rapid fire/normal shooting + FRFSRF, and lastly rapid fire + FRFSRF.

This way I think it is a little easier to compare "normal shooting + shred" (Section1 line C) vs normal shooting + FRFSRF (Section2 line A); I also included the entirety of the effects including the unit already having FRFSRF so that if FRFSRF was kept as it is, what should people expect to see if they wanted to use abilities/psy powers that grant reroll modifiers.


----------



## ntaw (Jul 20, 2012)

So then if FRFSRF makes you shoot more why do all of your comparisons show the difference in wounds between FRFSRF and the same number of shots with TL, shred, or both?


----------



## Fallen (Oct 7, 2008)

well, in the excel file you can see that I am finding the wounds for a total of 12 things.

First is the amount of wounds with no modifiers, amount of wounds with rerolls to hit, amount of wounds with rerolls to wound, and amount of wounds with rerolls to hit & to wound.

the 2nd and 3rd step is simply doing the same math for when the unit is using rapid fire (or FRFSRF as it is the same output of dice), and rapid fire WITH FRFSRF.

I did it this way because it is a little easier, at least for me, to explain that "normal shooting" with ANY modifier vs Normal Shooting + Rapid Fire/FRFSRF with no modifier and the expectations between them.

Likewise I can compare with the same ease between Normal shooting + Rapid fire vs Normal shooting + Rapid Fire + FRFSRF with the same principles.

----

The middle section can be used to compare the top and bottom sections - do you wish to compare the unit's output when it receives FRFSRF when it is also rapid firing or not?


----------



## ntaw (Jul 20, 2012)

It helps me to see comparative results together, so if you'll bear with me and if I'm reading your new spreadsheet correctly:



> 18 lasguns shooting at 13-24" range (rounding down to-wound):
> 
> standard no modifiers, 18 shots = 3 wounds
> 
> ...





> 18 lasguns shooting at 12" or less range:
> 
> standard no modifiers, 36 shots = 6 wounds
> 
> ...


Notice any discrepancies from your previous results?


----------



## Fallen (Oct 7, 2008)

@ntaw - First off your table is indeed correct...and after checking the original excel in the OP, I noticed that it had an error when calculating the amount of successful wounds for the "reroll to hit" section - I gave it too many hits to base its number off of.

Besides that I haven't been able to notice any errors - that alone makes Shred a little more powerful than Twin-Linked.

If anyone does notice a mathematical error, please let me know ASAP and I shall fix it.

----

The findings have lead me to think that FRFSRF is not all that it is cracked up to be, I personally think just giving the unit Twin-Linked, would be just as effective; granting the unit the Shred special rule might make it even more powerful than it currently is.


----------



## ntaw (Jul 20, 2012)

Fallen said:


> The findings have lead me to think that FRFSRF is not all that it is cracked up to be, I personally think just giving the unit Twin-Linked, would be just as effective; granting the unit the Shred special rule might make it even more powerful than it currently is.


Even though my examples show that FRFSRF outperforms shred and twin-linked at 13-24" and does basically the same damage within rapid fire range?


----------



## Fallen (Oct 7, 2008)

Yes, I think that having FRFSRF granting some combination of Twin-Linked and/or Shred can be just as effective as granting an additional shot.

That said would I change the rule, I don't know, but the evidence does tell that it is very close to the same output and can be argued that it is better.

Like I have said numerous times, this isn't about "let's change FRFSRF" it was about "I wonder what are the results between FRFSRF, Twin-Linked, Shred, and lastly the Twin-Linked & Shred combo". What everyone wishes to do with such information is up to them.



neferhet said:


> i can understand this. also, allowing a simple reroll would be much better for play-ability: more output, less dices.
> that would be a nice fix.


----------



## ntaw (Jul 20, 2012)

Fallen said:


> Yes, I think that having FRFSRF granting some combination of Twin-Linked and/or Shred can be just as effective as granting an additional shot.
> 
> *That said would I change the rule*, I don't know, but the evidence does tell that it is very close to the same output and can be argued that it is better.
> 
> *Like I have said numerous times, this isn't about "let's change FRFSRF"* it was about "I wonder what are the results between FRFSRF, Twin-Linked, Shred, and lastly the Twin-Linked & Shred combo". What everyone wishes to do with such information is up to them.


Your math says FRFSRF is better at range or just as good as the other options close up, you say this isn't about changing the order but you would change it, and finally it's all about just having less dice (ref. your quote from nef)? This is one absolutely confusing thread, pal.

If weight of fire isn't your thing then maybe you just aren't cut out for the Guard? :laugh:


----------

