New Poll: The LEAST Important Stat in 40k

Like the last poll, this new poll is concerning stats and their perceived value in 40k.  Unlike the last one, we’re not focusing on which are the most important stats, but rather which are the LEAST important.  Though the old poll is complete, I’m not going to post the results yet, as it could skew the results of this poll (though I’m sure you can find them if you look hard enough).

As with last week, I fully expect that answers to this poll will vary depending upon whether people play heavy shooting armies, or assault armies, but that’s part of the fun.  Since it might be hard for someone to pick just one answer, you’re allowed to pick up to three responses. 

You can vote on this poll to the right, or using the form below:

[poll id=”24″]

Image Credit: http://trust.guidestar.org/

Advertisements

25 comments on “New Poll: The LEAST Important Stat in 40k

  1. You have Wounds twice and are missing Ld, the truly most useless stat in 40k since 5th edition buffs everyone’s Ld and removes most of the Ld penalties and negafiers.

  2. I’ll repeat my comment from last time, now on topic at least. For me, leadership is underused, and toughness, wounds and save seem hazily defined, not least in terms of how they match up with vehicle armour and damage tables. That’s not even mentioning the USRs. The game’s been through so many editions I’d say it needs the dead wood cutting back in some areas and new growth encouraged.

  3. WS is by far the most worthless stat, it has the awsome effect of allowing a 3+ to hit instead of a 4+ to hit in close combat for some troops. It can’t ever get better then that, and in order to have your opponent’s chance to hit you go down your WS must be crazy high… Thats about it, sure as with any stat there are a couple random uses for it that don’t crop up in most games, but overall the above is just about the extent of it’s effect.

    WS is the only one i voted for, because all the other stats imo are pretty useful and can as they increase or decrease have major impact on most armies.

    I Suspect LD will be high, but i honestly disagree. Taking a leadership test at LD 7 is much scarier then at LD 9 or 10. The prevelance of Marine armies (which are all LD 8-10) is what delutes people’s opinions of the stat, but given it’s effect on so many game mechanics like Pinning, moral, pychic tests, ect. ect. ect. and the often terrible problems that occur should you fail these tests, it’s difficult to assign it a “least important stat” vote.

  4. WS is by far the most worthless stat, it has the awsome effect of allowing a 3+ to hit instead of a 4+ to hit in close combat for some troops. It can’t ever get better then that, and in order to have your opponent’s chance to hit you go down your WS must be crazy high… Thats about it, sure as with any stat there are a couple random uses for it that don’t crop up in most games, but overall the above is just about the extent of it’s effect.

    WS is the only one i voted for, because all the other stats imo are pretty useful and can as they increase or decrease have major impact on most armies.

    I Suspect LD will be high, but i honestly disagree. Taking a leadership test at LD 7 is much scarier then at LD 9 or 10. The prevelance of Marine armies (which are all LD 8-10) is what delutes people’s opinions of the stat, but given it’s effect on so many game mechanics like Pinning, moral, pychic tests, ect. ect. ect. and the often terrible problems that occur should you fail these tests, it’s difficult to assign it a “least important stat” vote.

    • WS10 is actually pretty handy against most things in the game as it makes it a 5+ to hit. Of course I only know of the Eldar Avatar to possess a WS of 10…

      But you’d think he’d hit things on a 2+ or at least get an automatic re-roll to hit seeing as he’s the Eldar version of Khorne.

    • WS10 is actually pretty handy against most things in the game as it makes it a 5+ to hit. Of course I only know of the Eldar Avatar to possess a WS of 10…

      But you’d think he’d hit things on a 2+ or at least get an automatic re-roll to hit seeing as he’s the Eldar version of Khorne.

  5. I went for WS (which never seems to make much difference), Leadership (low leadership sucks, but it’s not that common, and low leadership armies are generally set up to deal with failing leadership tests more than others) and Attacks.

    Although huge numbers of attacks are obviously better than a tiny amount, as an ork player I’ve charged huge mobs of boyz into marine squads, rolled handfulls of dice and achieved very little. Loads of weak attacks doesn’t seem to have as much impact (given the danger of retaliation in close combat) compared with loads of weak shooting attacks. Perhaps it’s because my expectations of the shooting phase are always low, whereas I always hope I’ll pretty well in close combat.

  6. I went for WS (which never seems to make much difference), Leadership (low leadership sucks, but it’s not that common, and low leadership armies are generally set up to deal with failing leadership tests more than others) and Attacks.

    Although huge numbers of attacks are obviously better than a tiny amount, as an ork player I’ve charged huge mobs of boyz into marine squads, rolled handfulls of dice and achieved very little. Loads of weak attacks doesn’t seem to have as much impact (given the danger of retaliation in close combat) compared with loads of weak shooting attacks. Perhaps it’s because my expectations of the shooting phase are always low, whereas I always hope I’ll pretty well in close combat.

  7. its leadership , because its always invariably in some way at least 8 , pinning is a joke in 40k as is anything approaching rules for psychology , the ‘low’ leadership armies always seem to have a way around it too, should arguably be one of the most important.

    And WS could use some work , Im twice as skilled as you but only find it as easy to hit you some dude who’s had a bit more training than you ? you need a truly obscene WS stat to just make it harder for others to hit you ….

  8. strength and wounds for me, but that very much depends on how you play. I perfer short range fire fights and so so try to avoid using strength (assault) and wounds is one of those where it just doesn’t matter. Most things have one wound anyway, character have 2-3 occasionaly you get something uber, (avatar, hehehehehehehe), please note, i have a Eldar army and love using him. But i always find that its 1 wound models that win a game so again not all that important.

    I would say though, Ld is important when playing a very tactical game (another reason for having the avatar, making all eldar within 12″ fearless). Look at things that force Ld checks, hell hounds etc. Ilve seen these devistate armies dispite only causing a few casualties. Happened at the throne of skulls i watched about 600 points of orcs flee across a board after loosing 3 guys from a hellhound! (Tehehe, my hell hound 😀 ).

  9. It is interesting to note as far as 40K’s focus, four stats are mostly only used for close combat (WS, S, I, A), and only one is normally used exclusively for ranged combat (BS). The remaining ones (Wounds, T, Sv, Ld) are mostly used when acted upon, not active themselves (things like IG orders and such aside).

    • Yeah, when I posted this, I started thinking the same. Why does it take
      four times as many stats for assault as it does shooting? Makes me wonder
      if they’ll simplify things even more in 6th edition (or perhaps gum up
      shooting)?

Have something to add?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s