mazog
Junior Strategist
Walking and talking
Posts: 748
|
Post by mazog on Nov 12, 2017 12:25:14 GMT
One of the dilemmas that Champs now face is deciding whether or not to use Sanguine Bond. Certain circumstances, like Sniper, are no-brainers, but what about when a jack that has one more attack does, say, 8 damage to the only champ it can reach? What are your breakpoints for using it or not, and are they different if retaliatory strike is on the table? Let's keep it simple and assume scenario is not a consideration for this discussion.
|
|
|
|
Post by Trollock on Nov 12, 2017 12:39:22 GMT
I do not think there are any simple rules to follow. You just have to assess the situation and ask yourself "what way will win me the game?". Is that jack going to smack the champ another three times? chances are that he will manage to kill at least one. Then you can just roll tough and hope for it. Will the jack not get any more attacks? then you sanguine away, preferably taking 4 damage on some guy you think will die anyway. Will the jack get one more attack, but he needs to roll an unboosted 9 to hit? Id probably sanguine and hope for the best there. Will you get a ret strike if you sanguine? will that matter?
so many questions...
|
|
|
|
Post by ikeda on Nov 12, 2017 13:52:37 GMT
My debate is always about "will a unit survive for Madrak to feat". So if the answer is "yes" I used it. If not, then let them die and they take the whole shebang. It's been very hit or miss lately.
|
|
|
|
Post by elricaltovilla on Nov 12, 2017 14:23:51 GMT
There are also times where you want a model to survive because its placement is important for protecting your other models. If you've got a champ that's blocking a charge lane to your caster, you darn well better keep him alive.
|
|
mazog
Junior Strategist
Walking and talking
Posts: 748
|
Post by mazog on Nov 13, 2017 14:20:49 GMT
This is about what I thought. I had hoped someone might have mathed it out a bit, but maybe I'll have to do that when I get some spare time.
|
|
mattmcd
Junior Strategist
Posts: 521 
|
Post by mattmcd on Nov 13, 2017 16:24:09 GMT
This is about what I thought. I had hoped someone might have mathed it out a bit, but maybe I'll have to do that when get wine spare time. In my experience wine spare time is not the best time to do math. ;-) lol |
|
|
|
Post by trollsareblue on Nov 16, 2017 21:12:42 GMT
This is about what I thought. I had hoped someone might have mathed it out a bit, but maybe I'll have to do that when I get some spare time. The math with 8 box infantry was ~11 damage was too much to be worth soaking most of the time. I'm not sure 5 box infantry allow for that kind of rule, though. |
|
mazog
Junior Strategist
Walking and talking
Posts: 748
|
Post by mazog on Nov 16, 2017 22:26:47 GMT
This is about what I thought. I had hoped someone might have mathed it out a bit, but maybe I'll have to do that when I get some spare time. The math with 8 box infantry was ~11 damage was too much to be worth soaking most of the time. I'm not sure 5 box infantry allow for that kind of rule, though. How did you come by that math? It fits with my intuition, but I'm curious how the calculation was made. |
|
|
|
Post by trollsareblue on Nov 16, 2017 22:45:19 GMT
The math with 8 box infantry was ~11 damage was too much to be worth soaking most of the time. I'm not sure 5 box infantry allow for that kind of rule, though. How did you come by that math? It fits with my intuition, but I'm curious how the calculation was made. I didn't. It came from the old Protectorate forums. You might have some luck asking there for opinions. |
|
