Elemental Cloak or Cloak of Shadows?

[MrSaucy]

I have a problem deciding between Cloak of Shadows and Elemental Cloak when I am playing a Dark Mage and the opponent is a Warlock or Wizard. Both cloaks have their pros and cons. Cloak of Shadows works best when you keep your distance from the opponent, but as either Dark Mage you need to be close to the enemy to be effective. Elemental Cloak is always working, but Cloak of Shadows protects you from ranged attacks that aren't fire/lightning spells as well as enchantments and incantations targeting you from 2 zones away.

Which is better? Not overall, but in which situations would you choose one over the other?

I am eager to hear peoples' opinions.

[Aylin]

I don't have DvN yet, but I think in Warlock books I'd stick with Elemental Cloak...just because I'm going to be too close most of the time for Obscured to do anything (and Light damage is pretty weak at the moment regardless).

For a Necromancer it would depend on if my strategy involved closing with the enemy or staying back more like a Wizard. I'm not sure which strategy is more effective though.

[MrSaucy]

Here are my thoughts:

Warlock vs Warlock: Elemental Cloak (for both sides). If one Warlock is going solo-rush it won't mean anything to have protection from 2 zones away.

Warlock vs Wizard: Warlock should go Elemental Cloak vs Fire/Air Wizard, Cloak of Shadows vs Earth/Water Wizard.

Necromancer vs Warlock: Necromancer should wear Elemental Cloak. He won't be able to stay 2 zones away from a Warlock for ever.

Necromancer vs Wizard: Necromancer should wear Elemental Cloak for same reason as Necromancer vs Warlock.


So... when I think about it Elemental Cloak is nearly always the better option. Is Cloak of Shadows a hint that the Necromancer works best from 2 zones away? Perhaps. But I have always had more success being closer to the opponent mage (and therefore closer to my zombies.)

[cymyn]

I'm a big fan of the elemental cloak, but I'm going to run cloak of shadows in my Nec deck because I want the enemy mage to have to get in close so I can overrun him with bony bad guys.  I see it as subtly offensive as opposed to the EC which is pure D. Haven't actually used it yet, though, so just speculationing.

[The Dude]

What cloak of shadows is extremely good for is forcing the opponent to move in close enough for you to reap havoc on the opponent. During playtest games, dropping this card plus an idol of pestilence early forces the enemy to at least close ranks and make a much tighter formation in order to beat you down with. The card is not so good against aggro mages, but even then, if you can manage to keep your distance (maybe a huge wall if bones that you can reconstruct over and over again?). The card is definitely an interesting one, but I think your safest bet would be to run one of each.

[baronzaltor]

I once had Cloak of Shadows backfire on me.  I cast it on myself off of a Battleforge, then was obscured.. so the Battleforge couldn't put more equipment on me till I got back into 1 range of it.

I personally like both a lot though, I try to squeeze them both in and just play by ear match to match.

[MrSaucy]

Alright. Will definitely run both E. Cloak and Cloak of Shadows. When it comes to playing aggressive mages that want to be close E. Cloak definitely sounds like the better option. When it comes to playing mages that like to play from a distance Cloak of Shadows will be my choice.

Then again, one can always go Cloak of Shadows + Dragonscale Hauberk or Cloak of Shadows + Stormdrake Hide for protection from fire/lightning and the obscured trait.