princeraven
Junior Strategist
Shredder spam is best spam
Posts: 256
|
Post by princeraven on Sept 7, 2017 5:18:51 GMT
Yes -2 DEF is better than a reroll almost all of the time, but the reality of the game means the Ice Witches aren't always able to draw line of sight or get range to their target, let alone that if you need a 9 to hit the model you want to buff you're unlikely to hit the target with a MAG 6 Ice Cage anyway. Puppet Master you only need to get within range and line of sight of your own model, and it automatically hits.
Also you can use both Puppet Master and Ice Cage, there are 3 models in the unit and they don't have to all choose the same spell.
|
|
|
Post by josephkerr on Sept 7, 2017 5:58:16 GMT
For Ravagores, Angelii, Zuriel, etc, its not just the attack roll u can flub. Puppet Master also fixes a bad damage roll, which can be nearly as bad as a poor attack roll.
|
|
kungpoh
Demo Gamer
Legion Player
Posts: 10
|
Post by kungpoh on Sept 7, 2017 7:44:58 GMT
I solely use PPM on my own Warbeasts, using it own my own to solidify a die role i find is more reliable to then to put it own my opponent, the amount of times when i needed a crit to throw with Typhon, a crit slam with Azreal or a crit push KD with Bolt thrower, has made it so much more reliable to fish for crits.
|
|
|
Post by snotling on Sept 7, 2017 11:08:04 GMT
They also make stuff better without needing to roll. Getting flare or a -def spell ob a target can be hard enough in itself
|
|
twity
Junior Strategist
Posts: 179
|
Post by twity on Sept 7, 2017 11:31:11 GMT
Your math seems right, but the major problem with in the -2 defense vs reroll argument is the fact that the reroll is chosen. That means that out of all trials it only matters on a miss, when it then elevates the chance to hit. The math will skew pretty wildly but the efficacy of the reroll will be more effective when you need to prevent spikes instead of fixing a defense. If an angelius needs to roll a six to hit on the armor pierce the -2 defense will take it from a 72.2% to a 91.6%. However, the reroll will take it from a 72.2% to a 92.4%. This will skew harder as you lower the die roll needed. If you are looking to normalize dice rolls to a mean value to ensure success the reroll could be more effective. Not always, but sometimes.
|
|
|
Post by DanX on Sept 7, 2017 13:34:28 GMT
Your right with the maths, problem is the chances of a witch hitting Def 16 is very low
|
|
|
Post by snotling on Sept 7, 2017 14:18:50 GMT
What is it with the witches hitting things? You appy it to your stuff withour needing to hit.
Putting it on opponents for defense is added utility, and has nothing to do with the -2def (for wich you have to hit high def in most cases) vs rr argument.
|
|
|
Post by cainuslupus on Sept 8, 2017 9:38:51 GMT
Ice Cage on Witches has two main uses: - sealing the deal when something else put two already on some high priority target (caster etc.) - making some target with Admonition /Dodge /Enervate stationary.
Magic Ability 6 is too weak to attempt lowering Def of something on its own.
|
|
|
Post by HauRukh on Sept 8, 2017 10:54:33 GMT
Since the discussion about Ice Cage is going on for a while with complaints about Magic Ability 6, I just wanted to point out that we DO have the Blood Seer, who can turn that up to Magic Ability 8. This gives fairly reasonable chances for Ice Cage and reasonably dangerous magical spray attacks.
For example in case of a magical assassination with Vayl2, you would probably want to place him near your target anyway, and adding some Ice Cages and Puppet Master on Vayl makes your assassination a lot safer.
With Slip Stream, Run (with flight) and CMD 6, you can "mark" targets 10+2+6= 18 inch from his position, which makes this very realistic.
|
|
eauc
Junior Strategist
Posts: 209
|
Post by eauc on Sept 8, 2017 10:56:24 GMT
Another point regarding the utility of Ice Cage vs high DEF targets : personnally I often chain multiple DEF debuffs when I want to debuff a DEF14~16 model anyway. My goal is to get it down to ~DEF10 if I want an heavy or multiple shooters to kill it. Just getting it down to DEF12~14 is often not enough to guaranty the kill. So I generally start with the warlock's DEF debuff if it has one (generally the warlock is the one that have the most chances to hit), then I apply flare with the seraph, and if it's not enough that's where I start to apply Ice cage from BFS. Even in the case I'm aiming for stationnary, I start with at least flare to get the first Ice Cage roll to ~5+. Generally if I'm going for this plan (instead of Kiss), it's important enough that I'd rather spoil the flare from my seraph and/or the debuff from my caster to secure it. This just mean that, in my mind, I'll never ever have to apply Ice cage from the witches alone against high DEF targets. That's just not how I make my plans anyway. On the other hand, if I'm just trying to massively secure hits from my heavies against a spam of Khador-like profiles (DEF10 high ARM - I miss MAT6 on DEF10 often enough that I prefer to debuff DEF if I can), then the witches are a cheap(er than the BFS/Seraph) way to do it. Of course Ice cage is still useless in lot of situations. If you play Absy2 against a heavy spam, can trigger alpha hunter easily to go up to MAT8 on all your beasts, and don't face admonition - then you'll have to settle with PM to reroll some bad damage dice (which is not garanteed to happen). Dealing with DEF was kind of a nightmare for me in mk2, I find it amusing that now Legion is not far from being the faction that can apply the most massive DEF debuffs. Bringing a DEF16 caster standing on a hill, down to DEF-6 was a funny experience
|
|
|
Post by Falcen on Sept 8, 2017 12:15:04 GMT
CID cycles are 6 weeks, right? So the Witches are halfway by now?
I feel like they suffer from the usual Legion problem: to much stuff for to many points. If you apply their offensive spells, they're dead next turn. If you apply only PM they might not be worth 7pts. I would like to see them losing one of their attack spells and/or their crit but going down to 5-6pts. But that's all theorycraftinh, sadly I need more time to actually test them.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 8, 2017 12:26:05 GMT
CID cycles are typically about half that. Grymkin was so long because it was a whole faction. most of the other stuff has been 3 wks or so. really its however long they decide per CID cycle. it has not been consistent.
|
|
eauc
Junior Strategist
Posts: 209
|
Post by eauc on Sept 8, 2017 13:33:07 GMT
I think I've read somewhere the Christmas CID cycle will be 2 weeks...
|
|
|
Post by copperflame on Sept 8, 2017 13:53:36 GMT
In the playtest I want to do, I'm running Bloodseers for the +2 (Vayl2 - 2 Thrones, 2 Bloodseers, 2 units of Witches). I think I would be more than happy to drop the offensive capability and lower the points but I can't say that without testing them out. But due to RT, I may not get a chance to run this by the time I need to have the feedback in.
|
|
|
Post by chillychinaman on Sept 8, 2017 14:26:05 GMT
I think I've read somewhere the Christmas CID cycle will be 2 weeks... It's already been three weeks. And according to the rumblings in the Protectorate's section, today is the last day of the CID.
|
|