DoubleStrike Is worse

[Reddicediaries]

I just realized that doubestriking with galvitar is much worse against high armor opponents. It is better against low armor or dodgey opponents.

[Borg]

That's why you put cards like Rust, Acid Ball, Dissolve, Crumble or Devouring Jelly in your FM book.

[Reddicediaries]

But why would you use your full action? Why not just put 2 enchants down and swing while moving.

[jacksmack]

But why would you use your full action? Why not just put 2 enchants down and swing while moving.

are we playing same game?

[Halewijn]

you don't always need to move, and against something with 0-1 or Very high armor or resilient, the number of dice is always better. Around 2 armor, the full attack will be only slightly better. For 3-4 armor it's probably beter to use the quick strike.

For creatures with more armor, you can lower it with the things Borg mentioned and attack afterwards.
I'm guessing that the grimoire will contain critical strike, which will be incredibly strong for the forcemaster.

[jacksmack]

you don't always need to move, and against something with 0-1 or Very high armor or resilient, the number of dice is always better. Around 2 armor, the full attack will be only slightly better. For 3-4 armor it's probably beter to use the quick strike.

If we look at average damage then its never better to use quickstrike.

The piercing 2 will grant you maximum of 2 extra damage.
4 dice from second strike will grant you 2 critical on average.

This means we need to add in stuff like veterans belt, aegis or agony into the mix before the quick attack is better.

[Halewijn]

True, but piercing is almost certain while you depend on luck for critical hits. (For better or worse)

[jacksmack]

True, but piercing is almost certain while you depend on luck for critical hits. (For better or worse)

Why is it more certain that you roll normal hits vs critical hits?

[jacksmack]

my point is...


you roll 4 dice with first galvitar swing.... the chance of rolling no NORMAL hits (so piercing is useless) is the same as not rolling any CRITICAL hits on second swing.


Dont see why 1 is more luck dependant than the other.


Lets say that the enemy has 3 armor and 3 life left. You have bearstrength.
You can choose between 1 attack with 6 dice and 2 pierce or a attack with 6 dice followed up by attack with 4 dice.

What do you pick?

[Reddicediaries]

the thing is in that case, you will statiscally do 3 dmg on the first hit and 1 on the second. Compare that to 6 dice vs 1 armor.

[jacksmack]

the thing is in that case, you will statiscally do 3 dmg on the first hit and 1 on the second. Compare that to 6 dice vs 1 armor.

Thats so wrong you have no idea.

[Reddicediaries]

It might be, im not a math genius.

[Halewijn]

I dont say that the chances of normal is lower than crits, but the assuming you roll enough damage, especially when you have some melee +x, which most fm have, the piercing will make a difference. Only when you roll 1 or zero normal damage, the piercing fails. The chances.for this are low.

In the other case with high armor, your second roll will almost purely depend on rolling crits. your variance is much higher.

[jacksmack]

In the other case with high armor, your second roll will almost purely depend on rolling crits. your variance is much higher.

The math states the opposite.

Less variance with double strike.

[Halewijn]

Tomorrow i'll check and calculate.
Maybe Im wrong.

Anyway, we both agree that the doublestrike is almost always better.