Dice vs. Piercing

[sIKE]

Ok here it is I have opened up this topic because the poor "Re: About warlord only card" topic has been hi-jack by me so badly and I wish to apologize for that.

So I have been chewing on the arguments presented. So what I think I have been trying to say is the following:

When I am building a book and selecting creatures, I tend to favor those with natural piercing over the same cost creatures with more natural dice. Most creatures 2-3 level creatures roll anywhere from 3-4 dice. I think this way (wrong though it may be). I pick up a six sided MW dice with High Armor only two side effective, giving me a 1 in 3 chance per die to land damage. I add piercing to the analysis and for each additional point of piercing for the dice we are talking about (3-4 natural) I have made two additional faces available to place damage upon a object 2 in 3 chance per die w/ piercing. Being able to land more damage quickly is very important to me.

Now if I added in another dice against high armor, each additional dice would only have a 1 in 3 change of landing damage.

But for each additional point of piercing I have taken the change to land damage to 2 in 3 per die rolled.

Yes stacking Bear Strengths are part in parcel of my builds, but cutting through armor is very valuable to me, therefore my love of piercing.

Hope my illogic makes total sense!

[Sailor Vulcan]

It makes more sense if you're only rolling 1 die.

Which is better against 1 armor? Rolling 1 normal damage with piercing? Or rolling two normal damage?

Rolling more dice makes it more likely that you'll deal more damage than giving your attack piercing, but that's because of the possibility of critical damage still occurring with or without piercing. However, just because more dice is more useful, that doesn't change the fact that piercing is still useful.

[Gregstrom]

My perception is much like Imaginator's.  Your post suggests that you're treating a point of piercing as opening up two faces on all the dice you're rolling.  As each point of piercing can only add one point of damage to the total you roll, a better way to view it may be that the point of piercing is opening up one face on one die (and if you don't roll enough normal damage it won't even add that).

[sIKE]

It makes more sense if you're only rolling 1 die.

Which is better against 1 armor? Rolling 1 normal damage with piercing? Or rolling two normal damage?

Rolling more dice makes it more likely that you'll deal more damage than giving your attack piercing, but that's because of the possibility of critical damage still occurring with or without piercing. However, just because more dice is more useful, that doesn't change the fact that piercing is still useful.

Once again each die is an individual, the piercing buff gives each die that it effects a 33% boost (66% chance to hit), where as an additional die would still be at 33% chance to hit. Grouping dice and running statical models predicting out comes over the entire gamut of possibilities show that more dice is better. But where the game is mostly played is 3-4 dice rolled against 3-5 armor (in serious to semi competitive up to competitive games). This sweet spot is where piercing shines, especially if it is natural.

The point being when you play the guys out on OCTGN, the meta there revolves around High Armor. Both on the Mage and Creatures (Iron Golem or Rhino Hide etc.), looking to counter this I have only so many actions my mage can take each round. Natural piercing lets me counter this with only one full action. If it is my main guy (or two) I will buff with Bear Strength which helps better leverage the natural piercing. If I deem his next attack critical during the planning stage, formerly,I would pull out a melee buff incantation, but found, for the cost the additional piercing incantation buff was much more effective, in placing damage on target due to the high armor.

I truly believe that more natural piercing (Vorpal Blade for one) for mages, will change the meta at the high levels of the game making the actions of armoring up less potent when there are great counters to it that can cleave right through that armor. Therefore greatly lessening the value of stacking armor, not meaning that armor will go away but I think it will return back to a more reasonable level of 2 to 3 armor.

[Shad0w]

Thanks Sike for moving this to a new thread.

[DeckBuilder]

I truly believe that more natural piercing (Vorpal Blade for one) for mages, will change the meta at the high levels of the game making the actions of armoring up less potent when there are great counters to it that can cleave right through that armor. Therefore greatly lessening the value of stacking armor, not meaning that armor will go away but I think it will return back to a more reasonable level of 2 to 3 armor.

Oh sIKE... It's a sad day when you discover those who you have placed on a pedestal have Feet Of Clay...

Each point of Armour is less useful than the last. Please agree with this?

Where before a Mage was content with 4 armour (excess is diminishing returns), Vorpal Blade and Critical Strike will polarise builds

(a) no armour Defences (please let there be a Defence chest piece) but sadly Falcon Precision is a Silver Bullet
(b) even more Armour, full 7 (2x Leather, Cloak, Hauberk, Rhino) which Voltaric Shield and Veteran's Belt favours

I contend that, without any alternative route being offered to us, they will only exacerbate the arms race!
So then because some builds go Full 7 Armour, this means all builds must have Piercing tech as a tax etc.
A vicious circle of Cruise Missiles and Anti-Ballistic Missiles reminiscent of something from last century...

I sometimes look at design decisions that have been made and I wonder if it's been fully thought through...

Ok, I better retract my claws and stop there... (Neutered I feel, neutered!)

[sIKE]

Trust me, I have played against Charmyna and book clones based off his tactics and strategy's (which he is very very good at developing his playing skills using both) that staking more dice against more armor has diminishing returns. Making armor useless on the other hand is quite handy. The opposing mage spends actions and mana growing his armor repertoire and with I save my mana and other actions for other things, then with good timing I cast Piercing Strike for 2 mana, and ignore all his armor and put the hurt on him.

[Sailor Vulcan]

Piercing is still quite useful, no ones disputing that. But an extra effect die is generally even more useful. Now that I think about it, +1 attack die probably costs more mana in general than piercing +1. I'll have to check some card text to verify that though.

[Aylin]

I contend that, without any alternative route being offered to us, they will only exacerbate the arms race!
So then because some builds go Full 7 Armour, this means all builds must have Piercing tech as a tax etc.
A vicious circle of Cruise Missiles and Anti-Ballistic Missiles reminiscent of something from last century...

Acid attacks will also help against high armour (and Voltaric Shield), so if high-armour became prominent in the meta players have another option besides Pierce (choices likely dependent upon training and chosen strategy).

I think that players might just focus more of their books to countering anti-armour cards since that also helps high-armoured non-mage creatures, like Iron Golems. Plus cards like Wand of Healing, Dissolve/Explode/Steal Equipment, Dispel/Purge Magic are useful even if the opponent isn't focusing on piercing/corrode.

[DeckBuilder]

Good point, Aylin: Acid's Corrode and Dissolve would indeed be better, debuff defender and not buff attacker.
And then Water emerges triumphant... So no change there...

Corrode is a good example of how the designers are already solving this arms race.
(I wasn't too pleased with Veteran's Belt, maybe they thought it was an equaliser for Voltaric Shield).

Apart from War Mages (Warlord, Paladin, Warlock - "War" in his name!), I don't like mages being armoured.
It goes against my Gygaxian upbringing! (We already play a Vancian magic system of use-and-forget spells.)
Do these mages know the Spell Failure % for wearing a Dragonscale Hauberk? Urgh.

The designers really do read all these concerns voiced on this forum by fans.
In a very real way, the most active and insightful fans are shaping this game.
Which is actually a buzz, the charm of being part of the Mage Wars community.

[sIKE]

Yes these new features are great,

(I wasn't too pleased with Veteran's Belt, maybe they thought it was an equaliser for Voltaric Shield).

Interesting that this is basically takes damage that can't be absorbed by armor and make it so that it is absorbed by said armor. In my opinion, making Piercing even more valuable as it subtracts X from the target’s armor when determining the amount of damage dealt. reducing the value of this belt.

[Hedge]

Before  I get into this discussion lets get a few things out of the way.


First we all agree that the Dice/Armor statistic table in General discussion is what everyone in this discussion is using to assert their reasoning that +X dice is better than +X piercing.

Link- http://forum.arcanewonders.com/index.php?topic=13562.0

Second We all agree that Statistically +X Dice will roll and inflict more Damage After Armor deductions than +X Piercing will inflict, Following Said Table.

Third we agree That some Players expierence anecdotal evidence that seems to support that +x Piercing maybe at least as good, if not Better, than +X Dice.


Once Most Agree I will continue With an Interesting Hypothysis which contains something I think we all have overlooked.


Hedge

[sIKE]

Once Most Agree I will continue With an Interesting Hypothysis which contains something I think we all have overlooked.

Really? From the guy who loves to be the devils advocate?  I have to agree for you to proceed? Here we go, I hereby use my scepter of OP ownership and decree that everyone agrees with you. This time. Don't get used to it.

 

[Hedge]

Once Most Agree I will continue With an Interesting Hypothysis which contains something I think we all have overlooked.

Really? From the guy who loves to be the devils advocate?  I have to agree for you to proceed? Here we go, I hereby use my scepter of OP ownership and decree that everyone agrees with you. This time. Don't get used to it.

 

It really wasn't your agreement I was waiting for, because from the discussions you had here and in other threads I can Reasonable conclude that you already agree with all three.  Also I don't have time at this minute to type it all out I will have the time in a few hours though.

[sIKE]

I was just being farcical...