Nugget of info gleaned.

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

  • Fnarrr wrote:

    FYI the main reason there isn't an armour buff spell is because +1 armour is too poor compared to the other 2 defensive spells, but +2 armour is too good. Rerolls was too poor. +1 Armour and rerolls would be too good.

    I think +1 armour and +1 Aegis might be on par, someone fancy mathing this out?

    Then you could slap it on a Banner of Wisdom on a Deep Watch unit and get 2+/4++ DW. Imagine how happy Kroms will be.
    he won't be it's not default you'd need to get a spell of and we know he will rage at even the mention of magic from a dwarf
  • That's why I think (and was for years more) pushing for ability for Engineer as an either/or option (troop support or artillery support) to give units he's in +1 to AS.

    This way:
    1. we'd get some way to get at least one instance of armour improvement in the book;
    2. Engineer gets his own unique role, but since he's squishy and has low runic allowance, you can't just steamroll people with this function on a whim;
    3. This doesn't support gunlines in any significant way;
    4. We don't screw up runic selection, which is fine as it is.
    Northern Dwarfs Armybook in the Homebrew Section.

    Northern Dwarfs ADT

    The King in the North

    Furthermore, I consider that Carthage Norther Dwarfs Armybook must be destroyed made official! - Vitnar Ironbeard
  • Fnarrr wrote:

    FYI the main reason there isn't an armour buff spell is because +1 armour is too poor compared to the other 2 defensive spells, but +2 armour is too good. Rerolls was too poor. +1 Armour and rerolls would be too good.

    I think +1 armour and +1 Aegis might be on par, someone fancy mathing this out?

    Then you could slap it on a Banner of Wisdom on a Deep Watch unit and get 2+/4++ DW. Imagine how happy Kroms will be.
    What exactly do you want to compare ? +1 Arm & +1 Aegis with other two buff spells from dwarfs ?
  • Alzam wrote:

    Fnarrr wrote:

    FYI the main reason there isn't an armour buff spell is because +1 armour is too poor compared to the other 2 defensive spells, but +2 armour is too good. Rerolls was too poor. +1 Armour and rerolls would be too good.

    I think +1 armour and +1 Aegis might be on par, someone fancy mathing this out?

    Then you could slap it on a Banner of Wisdom on a Deep Watch unit and get 2+/4++ DW. Imagine how happy Kroms will be.
    What exactly do you want to compare ? +1 Arm & +1 Aegis with other two buff spells from dwarfs ?


    Looking first at only +1 Arm:

    +1 Armour is the same as -1 to hit if you reverse the value : 6+ Armor -> 5+ Armour give the same value as Hits on 2+ -> Hits on 3+ :



    Base Hit/Wound chance (12 rolls)
    -1 (Magic rune effects)
    Damage Reduction from Spell
    2+
    83% (10 success)
    67% (8 success)
    -20%
    3+
    67% (8 success)
    50% (6 success)
    -25%
    4+
    50% (6 success)
    33% (4 success)
    -33%
    5+
    33% (4 success)
    17% (2 success)
    -50%
    6+
    17%
    17%
    -0%



    Armor Save (12 rolls)
    +1 (Magic rune effects)
    Damage Reduction from Spell
    2+
    83%
    83%
    -0%
    3+
    67% (4 dead)
    83% (2 dead)
    -50%
    4+
    50% (6 dead)
    67% (4 dead)
    -33%
    5+
    33% (8 dead)
    50% (6 dead)
    -25%
    6+
    17% (10 dead)
    33% (8 dead)
    -20%
    7+
    0% (12 dead)
    17% (10 dead)
    -17%




    You look at the number of success/dead and say "bu it's always a difference of 2, it doesn't change !", but really you should look at the Damage Reduction column. Quick example : Let's say you don't have Arm, a enemy hit on 2+ and wound on 5+. If you give him -1 to hit, he has a 22% chance on dealing a wound, but only 14% if you give him -1 to wound ! (Pro tip, always target the weak spot for both buff and debuff). That's the reason why it's good to stack Arm btw, every point of Armour is more valuable than the previous one.

    So, back on topic, those things are the same :


    Boosting a X+ Armor Save
    (final Arm, after AP!)
    Giving -1 to a X+ roll
    Damage Reduction from Spell
    2+ Arm
    6+ to-hit/wound
    -0%
    3+ Arm
    5+ to-hit/wound
    -50%
    4+ Arm
    4+ to-hit/wound
    -33%
    5+ Arm
    3+ to-hit/wound
    -25%
    6+ Arm
    2+ to-hit/wound
    -20%
    7+ Arm
    N/A
    -17%




    The only question you have to ask yourself is in which category are you generally ?
    For to-hit, the enemy will either be hitting on 3' or 4' (most generally 4'), so you are looking at a constant ~30% Damage Reduction for that spell.
    For to-wound ... Well, it starts to be tricky from here. Since the range goes from wounds on 2+ for S6 to wounds on 5+ for S3, the efficiency of the spell would also be around ~30%, but not constant at all, with frequent spikes at both -20% and -50%.
    Now for Armour... Well, I don't play dwarf enough to know what type of Armour Save you usually get. If it's 4+~5+, you get the same efficiency as -1 to hit, but it all depends.

    Since both Armour Save and to-wound rolls are more variable (and generally linked!), it's not totally useless to compare the two.
    If you suppose S4=AP1, S5=AP2,..., and assume Resistance 4 : if you boost a 3+ Arm, you get same results for both spells, if you boost 4+,5+,6+ Arm, you better off giving -1 to wound. So in most cases (i.e, all cases where the enemy don't have a lower AP than what his Str suggest) -1 to wound is better.

    ....

    "But what about +1 Arm +1 Aegis" ? Yes, yes I know, I digress (sorry Fnarrr, you probably already know all that, but couldn't help, I had to explain for others ^^)
    Well, depends, do you already have an Aegis ? :D

    No Aegis : Better to use : (in brackets are % to kill with auto-hit)


    Arm 3+Arm 4+Arm 5+Arm 6+
    S3 AP0+Save (5% vs 6%)-Wound (8% vs 9%)-Wound (11% vs 14%)-Wound (14% vs 19%)
    S4 AP1+Save (14% vs 17%)+Save (21% vs 22%)Same (28%)-Wound (33% vs 35%)
    S5 AP2+Save (28% vs 33%)+Save (37% vs 42%)+Save (46% vs 50%)-Wound (50% vs 56%)
    S6 AP3+Save (46% vs 56%)+Save (58% vs 67%)-Wound (67% vs 70%)-Wound (67% vs 70%)



    Aegis 6+ : (no details for the middle one, too lazy :p)

    Arm 3+Arm 4+Arm 5+Arm 6+
    S3 AP0+Save-Wound-Wound-Wound
    S4 AP1+Save+Save+Save-Wound
    S5 AP2+Save+Save+Save-Wound
    S6 AP3+Save+SaveSameSame



    Aegis 5+ :

    Arm 3+Arm 4+Arm 5+Arm 6+
    S3 AP0+Save (3% vs 4%)Same (6%)-Wound (7% vs 8%)-Wound (9% vs 11%)
    S4 AP1+Save (8% vs 11%)+Save (13% vs 15%)+Save (17% vs 19%)+Save (20% vs 22%)
    S5 AP2+Save (17% vs 22%)+Save (22% vs 28%)+Save (28% vs 33%)Same (33%)
    S6 AP3+Save (28% vs 37%)+Save (35% vs 44%)+Save (42% vs 44%)+Save (42% vs 44%)

    Boy I hope I didn't mess that up

    Please note that, while there is a bigger difference between (46% vs 56%) than between (14% vs 19%), you have to compare the proportion lost, not straight up values : Imagine you got hit 100 times : going from 56->46 is 18% less dead, while going from 19->14 is 27% less dead. Someone conscientious would calculated those % less dead in addition to what I gave you (since both are useful to know), but it's late now :sleeping:

    Short conclusion : +1 Arm/+1 Aegis is maybe on par with the other two (if we consider -1 to-hit and -1 to-wound being on par with each other). Probably a little too strong, certainly too strong in the perfect situations (but -1 to Wound on S3 is also very strong...). But then again, it strongly depend on the situation.
  • Fantastic analysis!

    +1 Sv + 1 Aegis outperforms -1 to wound, slightly. The %s are very tight.
    The saves buff gets countered by caps (there are more situations where it does nothing, as S2 is nearly non-existent in game where same would occur for -1 to wound) and the Aegis is worse v Divine; in contrast the -1 to wound works vs S7 and higher.
    With that context in mind, I think we have a winner in this potential effect for a defensive spell!

    Worth noting not a single entry in the DH book has 6+ armour. The rightmost column in the middle table tells me -1 to wound is still better for seekers.
    Hristo Nikolov
  • I'm having a hard time understanding your Aegis save tables.

    If you already have aegis 5+, and increase it to 4+, how could you have the same result (for instance in the aegis 5+ table, S5 AP2 is the same for Armor 6)?

    Obviously the armor save is negated (6+ goes to 5+, but against AP2 is negated). But changing the aegis from a 5+ to a 4+ is obviously different.
  • The Beninator wrote:

    I'm having a hard time understanding your Aegis save tables.

    If you already have aegis 5+, and increase it to 4+, how could you have the same result (for instance in the aegis 5+ table, S5 AP2 is the same for Armor 6)?

    Obviously the armor save is negated (6+ goes to 5+, but against AP2 is negated). But changing the aegis from a 5+ to a 4+ is obviously different.
    In the table, I compare what result I get when casting +1 Save and -1 to-wound. So for S5AP2 6+, in both case the enemy end up with a 33% chance to kill a dwarf. It's not the same as with no spells, but rather same end result for both spells.
    It's the same for all cells. For example, S6AP3 3+ list +Save (28% vs 37%) meaning that casting +Save is better : opponents only has 28% chance to kill, versus 37% if I cast -1 to-wound.
    I didn't check how much better the odds get when casting the spell, only the difference between both spells.
  • Vitnar wrote:

    That's why I think (and was for years more) pushing for ability for Engineer as an either/or option (troop support or artillery support) to give units he's in +1 to AS.

    This way:
    1. we'd get some way to get at least one instance of armour improvement in the book;
    2. Engineer gets his own unique role, but since he's squishy and has low runic allowance, you can't just steamroll people with this function on a whim;
    3. This doesn't support gunlines in any significant way;
    4. We don't screw up runic selection, which is fine as it is.
    Sorry, I missed this part.

    Basically, if an infantry unit can get to 2+ armour with no way for the opponent to interfere (read: not with magic), the unit (or combo, whatever) is going to be expensive. Like, most likely unpleasantly expensive.

    The performance jump from 3+ to 2+ is really big.


    That's not to say its a flat NO - these decisions are not up to me to make. Just making sure you guys are aware of this, so no nasty surprises happen.
    Hristo Nikolov
  • Alzam wrote:

    In the table, I compare what result I get when casting +1 Save and -1 to-wound. So for S5AP2 6+, in both case the enemy end up with a 33% chance to kill a dwarf. It's not the same as with no spells, but rather same end result for both spells.It's the same for all cells. For example, S6AP3 3+ list +Save (28% vs 37%) meaning that casting +Save is better : opponents only has 28% chance to kill, versus 37% if I cast -1 to-wound.
    I didn't check how much better the odds get when casting the spell, only the difference between both spells.
    Ahh! makes sense, thanks for that!