Username:    Password:      Remember me       
Great White Games/Pinnacle Entertainment Group Forum Index Great White Games/Pinnacle Entertainment Group
Discussion Forum for PEG/GWG
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

First Strike/Counterstrike Question
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Great White Games/Pinnacle Entertainment Group Forum Index -> SW General Chat & Game Stories
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Ryche
Seasoned


Joined: 10 Apr 2010
Posts: 334

PostPosted: Tue Oct 30, 2012 11:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Zadmar wrote:

>>> ROUND 4:
First Strike launches an attack...
Fighting roll of 11 vs Parry of 7 = HIT WITH RAISE
Damage roll of 14 vs Toughness of 6 = SHAKEN, 2 WOUNDS
Counterattack spends a benny to try and Soak...
Vigor roll of 4 vs TN4 = SUCCESS (Soaks 1 wound)
Counterattack tries to recover from being shaken...
Spirit roll of 5-1=4 vs TN4 = SUCCESS
Counterattack is now using the 'Defend' maneuver (Parry increased to 9).
Counterattack moves adjacent to First Strike.
First Strike interrupts with a First Strike attack...
Fighting roll of 3 vs Parry of 9 = MISS
Counterattack launches a counterattack...
Fighting roll of 7-1=6 vs Parry of 7 = MISS


In this round Counterattack couldn't have used Defend since he just got out of shaken (without being able to take an action -- no raise on the Spirit roll). Also, why would you move next to your opponent if you weren't going to attack? Just to give him a free swing to hope your counter attack goes off? Seems like poor tactics.

In regard to Counter Attack and First Strike, both edges provide different things, and I think your combat simulator doesn't really work well for this. You have stacked the First Strike guy against the Counterattack, by giving him a non-core edge. Right there you have provided the First Strike the option to keep moving out of combat to force his opponent to close in each round. If I was playing the Counterattack guy, yeah you might get away with that once, but after that no so much.

I don't think your combat simulator presents a good representation, since there are too many factors that could be involved other that the mindless repetition of doing the same thing over and over, even when its not working for you. A semi-intelligent person may fall for the same tactic once or twice, but should be able to adjust.

For example the guy with Counterattack could attempt to disarm his opponent rendering his lunge obsolete and gaining the ability to attack an unarmed defender, then relying on his counter attack edge for a follow up if his opponent decides to still attack him. Or grab a reach weapon and neutralize both sides edges. Or use a Test of Wills, get the +2 to next action plus possibly shake the guy. Sure it doesn't do damage, but all you need to do is land a shaking blow to wound him.

But most fights I have seen are never one on one that often until possibly the end, and by that time you should have a good idea of your opponents abilities so you don't fall prey to his advantages.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Zadmar
Heroic


Joined: 10 Nov 2010
Posts: 1993
Location: Munich

PostPosted: Tue Oct 30, 2012 2:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ValhallaGH wrote:
There's something very odd with the Shaken scripts. In round 4 & 8 Counterattack only unshook, he didn't get a raise and couldn't use Defend. Then in round 10, Counterattack didn't need to unshake, so it didn't matter how well he did it.

Thanks, well spotted - I've only just added support for "use Defend when moving adjacent to someone with First Strike", so that I could answer Clint's question, and I rushed it a bit because I was short on time. Fixed now I think (touch wood) - here's with wild attack as well:

>>> ROUND 1:

Counterattack is now using the 'Defend' maneuver (Parry increased to 9).
Counterattack moves adjacent to First Strike.
First Strike interrupts with a First Strike attack...
Fighting roll of 12 vs Parry of 9 = HIT
Damage roll of 11 vs Toughness of 6 = SHAKEN, 1 WOUND
Counterattack spends a benny to try and Soak...
Vigor roll of 17 vs TN4 = SUCCESS WITH 3 RAISES (Soaks the wound, removes Shaken)
First Strike is now using Wild Attack (Parry reduced to 5).
First Strike launches an attack...
Fighting roll of 6+2=8 vs Parry of 9 = MISS
Counterattack launches a counterattack...
Fighting roll of 4 vs Parry of 5 = MISS
First Strike retreats 1" (no free attack due to weapon reach).

>>> ROUND 2:

Counterattack stops using the 'Defend' maneuver (Parry returns to 7).
Counterattack is now using the 'Defend' maneuver (Parry increased to 9).
Counterattack moves adjacent to First Strike.
First Strike interrupts with a First Strike attack...
Fighting roll of 7 vs Parry of 9 = MISS
Counterattack launches a counterattack...
Fighting roll of 7 vs Parry of 5 = HIT
Damage roll of 6 vs Toughness of 6 = SHAKEN
First Strike stops using Wild Attack (Parry returns to 7).
First Strike tries to recover from being shaken...
Spirit roll of 10 vs TN4 = SUCCESS WITH RAISE
First Strike is now using Wild Attack (Parry reduced to 5).
First Strike launches an attack...
Fighting roll of 3+2=5 vs Parry of 9 = MISS
First Strike retreats 1" (no free attack due to weapon reach).

>>> ROUND 3:

First Strike stops using Wild Attack (Parry returns to 7).
First Strike is now using Wild Attack (Parry reduced to 5).
First Strike launches an attack...
Fighting roll of 5+2=7 vs Parry of 9 = MISS
Counterattack launches a counterattack...
Fighting roll of 2 vs Parry of 5 = MISS
Counterattack stops using the 'Defend' maneuver (Parry returns to 7).
Counterattack is now using the 'Defend' maneuver (Parry increased to 9).
Counterattack moves adjacent to First Strike.
First Strike interrupts with a First Strike attack...
Fighting roll of 21 vs Parry of 9 = HIT WITH RAISE
Damage roll of 10 vs Toughness of 6 = SHAKEN, 1 WOUND
Counterattack spends a benny to try and Soak...
Vigor roll of 3 vs TN4 = FAILURE (Soaks 0 wounds)
Counterattack tries to recover from being shaken...
Spirit roll of 5-1=4 vs TN4 = SUCCESS
Counterattack only got a success when recovering from Shaken, no further actions.

>>> ROUND 4:

Counterattack stops using the 'Defend' maneuver (Parry returns to 7).
Counterattack is now using Wild Attack (Parry reduced to 5).
Counterattack launches an attack...
Fighting roll of 5+2-1=6 vs Parry of 5 = HIT
Damage roll of 6 vs Toughness of 6 = SHAKEN
First Strike stops using Wild Attack (Parry returns to 7).
First Strike tries to recover from being shaken...
Spirit roll of 1 vs TN4 = FAILURE
First Strike spends a benny to remove Shaken status.
First Strike is now using Wild Attack (Parry reduced to 5).
First Strike launches an attack...
Fighting roll of 5+2=7 vs Parry of 5 = HIT
Damage roll of 12 vs Toughness of 6 = SHAKEN, 1 WOUND
First Strike retreats 1" (no free attack due to weapon reach).

>>> ROUND 5:

First Strike stops using Wild Attack (Parry returns to 7).
First Strike is now using Wild Attack (Parry reduced to 5).
First Strike launches an attack...
Fighting roll of 11+2=13 vs Parry of 5 = HIT WITH RAISE
Damage roll of 19 vs Toughness of 6 = 3 WOUNDS, INCAPACITATED
Counterattack attempts to survive incapacitation...
Vigor roll of 3-2=1 vs TN4 = FAILURE (possibly dying)

>>> VICTORY: First Strike has defeated Counterattack.

However I'm not sure it really makes sense for Counterattack guy to bother moving if he's already used his Counterattack that round. Equally, I don't know if he should even be allowed to make a Counterattack if his opponent is out of reach.

ogbendog wrote:
if you have improved frenzy, then your foe can have improved counter attack

Right, but I already factored that into the comparison. The important point here is that Improved Counterattack only gives you the second attack if your opponent misses. This is particularly significant for one-on-one duels, where Wild Attack really shines, because both fighters will have +2 to attack and -2 Parry. With the characters I've used here, they only need to roll 3+ on one of their dice to hit.

ogbendog wrote:
blindly moving adjacent each round is just bad tactics.

They've invested two advances into First Strike and Lunge. If you've invested your two advances edges into Frenzy and Improved Frenzy (or Two-Fisted and Ambidextrous) then the odds are still in your favour, even if you keep charging them.

If you don't move adjacent to them, then they lose the benefit of their two combat edges - but you also lose the benefit of yours. And yours are better. If you've also invested in more combat edges, then you're losing out even more.

It's like arguing that attacking someone who has Two-Fisted is "bad tactics", because they'll get two attacks on you - even if you're a melee specialist with Improved Frenzy.

R˙che wrote:
why would you move next to your opponent if you weren't going to attack? Just to give him a free swing to hope your counter attack goes off?

Yes, Clint asked what would happen if "Counterattack Defends whenever he moves in". I had to update the simulator to handle that possibility, and rushed it (thus the bug).

R˙che wrote:
I don't think your combat simulator presents a good representation, since there are too many factors that could be involved other that the mindless repetition of doing the same thing over and over, even when its not working for you.

It's not supposed to cover decision-making, only brute force. Obviously player tactics will have a big impact, and I've never denied that, but I do think it can give a reasonably good feel for the general comparative effectiveness of different edges and builds.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ryche
Seasoned


Joined: 10 Apr 2010
Posts: 334

PostPosted: Tue Oct 30, 2012 3:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Zadmar wrote:
R˙che wrote:
why would you move next to your opponent if you weren't going to attack? Just to give him a free swing to hope your counter attack goes off?

Yes, Clint asked what would happen if "Counterattack Defends whenever he moves in". I had to update the simulator to handle that possibility, and rushed it (thus the bug).

Fair nuff, I read the wrong section of his post, re-reading what Clint said, I see your point.

Zadmar wrote:
R˙che wrote:
I don't think your combat simulator presents a good representation, since there are too many factors that could be involved other that the mindless repetition of doing the same thing over and over, even when its not working for you.

It's not supposed to cover decision-making, only brute force. Obviously player tactics will have a big impact, and I've never denied that, but I do think it can give a reasonably good feel for the general comparative effectiveness of different edges and builds.

I still feel there is more to it than comparing two edges against each other there has to be thought process--since it really doesn't exist in a vacuum. As I stated before, you have already skewed the fight by using Lunge. So really your point is that First Strike and Lunge is better than Counter Attack.

What happens when you remove the Lunge, and the First Strike opponent cannot move back for free? Is is that Lunge is giving the advantage and not the First Strike? Give the guy with Counter Attack lunge as well and save him the issue of having to close. Then both lose their edges and its a straight up fight.

IMHO, to compare the two you need to stick with just the edges in the core book since they should be somewhat balanced against each other.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ValhallaGH
Legendary


Joined: 25 Apr 2010
Posts: 5911

PostPosted: Tue Oct 30, 2012 3:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

R˙che wrote:
What happens when you remove the Lunge, and the First Strike opponent cannot move back for free?

You give him a spear, which restores the reach and gives him +1 Parry (replaces the shield). That drops his damage by 1 on average, but no one is wearing armor so that's probably not going to swing things.
_________________
"Got a problem? I've got the solution: Rocket Launcher."
"Not against a Servitor."
"... We're all gonna die."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ogbendog
Legendary


Joined: 29 Jul 2004
Posts: 2267

PostPosted: Tue Oct 30, 2012 4:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

so give CA guy a spear, he wins.

the fact is that in a duel, FS isn't as useful; your foe will work around; they won't just keep closing in.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Wibbs
Veteran


Joined: 02 Jan 2011
Posts: 564
Location: London

PostPosted: Tue Oct 30, 2012 5:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Which is why I find these very dry theoretical comparisons have very little in common with actual practice and usefulness of Edges and abilities for players in my games.

You can argue all day long about the efficacy of particular Edges when pitted against eachother in a toe to toe duel, but as this scenario would almost never ever happen in an actual game, I struggle to see much value in the conclusions made.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ogbendog
Legendary


Joined: 29 Jul 2004
Posts: 2267

PostPosted: Tue Oct 30, 2012 5:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

something like, say, frenzy vs two weapon might be more valid.

or, one guy wild attacking all the time, the other guy not. First strike is one of the more complicated one, it requires more tactics to use.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Zadmar
Heroic


Joined: 10 Nov 2010
Posts: 1993
Location: Munich

PostPosted: Tue Oct 30, 2012 7:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

R˙che wrote:
I still feel there is more to it than comparing two edges against each other there has to be thought process--since it really doesn't exist in a vacuum. As I stated before, you have already skewed the fight by using Lunge. So really your point is that First Strike and Lunge is better than Counter Attack.

Well no, my original point was to compare "four alternative ways to get two penalty-free attacks with two edges", and the point I made in my first post in this thread was that "while Counterattack did come last, the difference was very small, and could be made up through other tactical options. First Strike was also paired with a non-core Edge, which some GMs don't allow."

And that latter point also tied into a comment I made in the other thread, which was that "Although Lunge isn't a core edge, I don't think it would be overpowered to make it one ... Lots of pros and cons, and I think it makes an interesting build".

ogbendog wrote:
so give CA guy a spear, he wins.

Which is why I said in my first post, "But it's swings and roundabouts. If the Counterattack fighter had a reach weapon, the First Strike character wouldn't gain any benefit from their Edges."

ogbendog wrote:
the fact is that in a duel, FS isn't as useful; your foe will work around; they won't just keep closing in.

You can't win a duel purely through tricks, taunts and intimidation - particularly if your opponent is repeatedly stabbing you from 1" away.

Would you move adjacent to someone with Two-Fisted? Or someone with Improved Frenzy? Would you attack someone with Improved Counterattack? At the end of the day, it's no different to chasing someone with First Strike - they're getting an extra attack per round.

Wibbs wrote:
You can argue all day long about the efficacy of particular Edges when pitted against eachother in a toe to toe duel, but as this scenario would almost never ever happen in an actual game, I struggle to see much value in the conclusions made.

Because it provides insight into how the different mechanics interact, and what impact different types of bonus can have. When designing new edges, I find it particularly useful to compare them directly against other edges.

Player tactics and specific scenarios can have a big impact in the usage of an edge, but you still need some degree of underlying balance. If the edges are roughly on-par with each other without special tactics, and they've each got their own pros and cons, then that means players have some interesting choices.

In the thread I linked to earlier, I pointed out that "if you combine their total wins, Two-Fisted is only 0.02% ahead of Frenzy (327038 wins vs 326971 wins)" (in a straight-out fight) - and both options have a number of additional pros and cons, and situations and tactics where one performs better than the other. That's a perfect example if the sort of thing I'm talking about.

ogbendog wrote:
something like, say, frenzy vs two weapon might be more valid.

I included that as well, in my first post. I compared four alternative ways to get two penalty-free attacks per round using two edges.

ogbendog wrote:
or, one guy wild attacking all the time, the other guy not.

I included those, too. By the way, the only occasion I've seen where Wild Attack doesn't improve your chances is when I ran 4 vs 1.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ogbendog
Legendary


Joined: 29 Jul 2004
Posts: 2267

PostPosted: Wed Oct 31, 2012 2:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Zadmar wrote:


ogbendog wrote:
the fact is that in a duel, FS isn't as useful; your foe will work around; they won't just keep closing in.

You can't win a duel purely through tricks, taunts and intimidation - particularly if your opponent is repeatedly stabbing you from 1" away.


the idea is to trick/taunt/etc to shake your foe, then move in. if you shake them, they don't get a FS / have to burn a bennie to get a FS. And even if they burn a bennie, you have +2 vs them.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Zadmar
Heroic


Joined: 10 Nov 2010
Posts: 1993
Location: Munich

PostPosted: Wed Oct 31, 2012 7:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

ogbendog wrote:
the idea is to trick/taunt/etc to shake your foe, then move in. if you shake them, they don't get a FS / have to burn a bennie to get a FS. And even if they burn a bennie, you have +2 vs them.

The problem is you need a raise to shake them, and you'll suffer a -2 MAP if you wish to attack the same round. So you have beat them by 6+ on an opposed roll. Even if you've got d12 and they've got d4, the odds are still against you - and even if you should you somehow succeed, the +2 bonus to attack is cancelled out by the -2 MAP anyway.

Tricks, Taunt and Intimidate are great for teamwork, or against people you're not able to attack (eg an archer who's too far away to reach), or for buying time when you're trying to escape, but unless I had specialised edges such as Strong Willed, Dirty Fighter, Tricky Fighter, Bewildering Warrior, Good or Bad Reputation, etc, I wouldn't use them in a one-on-one melee duel to the death.

It's like using two weapons without Two-Fisted or Ambidextrous, or using Rapid Attack when your opponent already has a half-decent Parry. You're just lowering your chances of winning.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ogbendog
Legendary


Joined: 29 Jul 2004
Posts: 2267

PostPosted: Wed Oct 31, 2012 12:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

you wouldn't do it and attack in the same round.

you trick/taunt/intimidate, then if you get a raise, next round if they are still shaken you move in.

taunt or intimidate is better; if all you get is a basic success, it gives you +2 on your attempt next round. Tuant isn't as useful as the bonus is only to melee attacks and you lose it if they win init.

if you assume a d6 taunt or intimidate, you ave about a 50% chance of getting a +2 on your foe. He moves in and attacks, he has less than a 50% chance of hitting you (all else being equal)

now you have a +2 on your taunt, all you need to do is beat them by 2 and they are shaken.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Zadmar
Heroic


Joined: 10 Nov 2010
Posts: 1993
Location: Munich

PostPosted: Sat Nov 03, 2012 6:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

ogbendog wrote:
you wouldn't do it and attack in the same round.

you trick/taunt/intimidate, then if you get a raise, next round if they are still shaken you move in.

taunt or intimidate is better; if all you get is a basic success, it gives you +2 on your attempt next round. Tuant isn't as useful as the bonus is only to melee attacks and you lose it if they win init.

if you assume a d6 taunt or intimidate, you ave about a 50% chance of getting a +2 on your foe. He moves in and attacks, he has less than a 50% chance of hitting you (all else being equal)

now you have a +2 on your taunt, all you need to do is beat them by 2 and they are shaken.

Okay, I've updated my simulator to handle Intimidation. First let's try the chase approach, which is no longer quite as effective since I've corrected the issue Clint mentioned:

There were 100000 fights. Two-Fisted+Ambidextrous won 46954 of them, while First Strike+reach won 53046.

This time the first character will use your tactic, with d6 in Intimidation:

There were 100000 fights. Two-Fisted+Ambidextrous won 7732 of them, while First Strike+reach won 92268.

With d12 Intimidation:

There were 100000 fights. Two-Fisted+Ambidextrous won 17622 of them, while First Strike+reach won 82378.

Here's an example fight, to make sure I understood your proposal correctly:

>>> ROUND 1:

Alpha attempts to intimidate Beta...
Intimidation roll of 8 opposed by 5 = SUCCESS (+2 to next action)
Beta is now using Wild Attack (Parry reduced to 5).
Beta launches an attack...
Fighting roll of 3+2=5 vs Parry of 7 = MISS

>>> ROUND 2:

Beta stops using Wild Attack (Parry returns to 7).
Beta is now using Wild Attack (Parry reduced to 5).
Beta launches an attack...
Fighting roll of 12+2=14 vs Parry of 7 = HIT WITH RAISE
Damage roll of 14 vs Toughness of 6 = SHAKEN, 2 WOUNDS
Alpha spends a benny to try and Soak...
Vigor roll of 3 vs TN4 = FAILURE (Soaks 0 wounds)
Alpha tries to recover from being shaken...
Spirit roll of 13-2=11 vs TN4 = SUCCESS WITH RAISE
Alpha attempts to intimidate Beta...
Intimidation roll of 9+2-2=9 opposed by 4 = RAISE (Shaken and +2 to next action)

>>> ROUND 3:

Alpha is now using Wild Attack (Parry reduced to 5).
Alpha moves adjacent to Beta.
Alpha launches an attack...
Fighting roll of 9+2+2-2=11 vs Parry of 5 = HIT WITH RAISE
Damage roll of 12 vs Toughness of 6 = 1 WOUND
Beta spends a benny to try and Soak...
Vigor roll of 5 vs TN4 = SUCCESS (Soaks the wound, removes Shaken)
Alpha launches an offhand attack...
Fighting roll of 3+2-2=3 vs Parry of 5 = MISS
Beta stops using Wild Attack (Parry returns to 7).
Beta is now using Wild Attack (Parry reduced to 5).
Beta launches an attack...
Fighting roll of 11+2=13 vs Parry of 5 = HIT WITH RAISE
Damage roll of 7 vs Toughness of 6 = SHAKEN
Beta retreats 1" (no free attack due to weapon reach).

>>> ROUND 4:

Alpha stops using Wild Attack (Parry returns to 7).
Alpha tries to recover from being shaken...
Spirit roll of 5-2=3 vs TN4 = FAILURE
Alpha spends a benny to remove Shaken status.
Alpha attempts to intimidate Beta...
Intimidation roll of 10-2=8 opposed by 3 = RAISE (Shaken and +2 to next action)
Beta stops using Wild Attack (Parry returns to 7).
Beta tries to recover from being shaken...
Spirit roll of 4 vs TN4 = SUCCESS
Beta spends a benny to act this round.
Beta is now using Wild Attack (Parry reduced to 5).
Beta launches an attack...
Fighting roll of 4+2=6 vs Parry of 7 = MISS

>>> ROUND 5:

Alpha attempts to intimidate Beta...
Intimidation roll of 5+2-2=5 opposed by 7 = FAILURE
Beta stops using Wild Attack (Parry returns to 7).
Beta is now using Wild Attack (Parry reduced to 5).
Beta launches an attack...
Fighting roll of 4+2=6 vs Parry of 7 = MISS

>>> ROUND 6:

Alpha attempts to intimidate Beta...
Intimidation roll of 10-2=8 opposed by 5 = SUCCESS (+2 to next action)
Beta stops using Wild Attack (Parry returns to 7).
Beta is now using Wild Attack (Parry reduced to 5).
Beta launches an attack...
Fighting roll of 4+2=6 vs Parry of 7 = MISS

>>> ROUND 7:

Alpha attempts to intimidate Beta...
Intimidation roll of 4+2-2=4 opposed by 3 = SUCCESS (+2 to next action)
Beta stops using Wild Attack (Parry returns to 7).
Beta is now using Wild Attack (Parry reduced to 5).
Beta launches an attack...
Fighting roll of 9+2=11 vs Parry of 7 = HIT WITH RAISE
Damage roll of 15 vs Toughness of 6 = SHAKEN, 2 WOUNDS, INCAPACITATED
Alpha attempts to survive incapacitation...
Vigor roll of 5-3=2 vs TN4 = FAILURE (possibly dying)

>>> VICTORY: Beta has defeated Alpha.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ogbendog
Legendary


Joined: 29 Jul 2004
Posts: 2267

PostPosted: Sat Nov 03, 2012 9:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

looks about right, but this again is FS guy with a reach weapon or a non-core edge.
what edges did his foe have? strong willed would be appropriate
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Zadmar
Heroic


Joined: 10 Nov 2010
Posts: 1993
Location: Munich

PostPosted: Sat Nov 03, 2012 12:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ogbendog wrote:
looks about right, but this again is FS guy with a reach weapon or a non-core edge.
what edges did his foe have? strong willed would be appropriate

Ambidextrous and Two-Fisted, as I mentioned. All of the examples here are comparisons of two builds using two edges to get two penalty-free attacks.

You said that "First strike is better if you fight a lot of (dumb) foes who move up into range of you", and that "blindly moving adjacent each round is just bad tactics". You proposed "trick/taunt/intimidate, then if you get a raise, next round if they are still shaken you move in ... if you assume a d6 taunt or intimidate"

Well, that's exactly what I simulated. The character with Two-Fisted and Ambidextrous tried using Intimidation instead of moving adjacent each round. His chances of winning dropped from around 47% to around 8%.

This reinforces the opinion I made earlier: "Tricks, Taunt and Intimidate are great for teamwork, or against people you're not able to attack (eg an archer who's too far away to reach), or for buying time when you're trying to escape, but unless I had specialised edges such as Strong Willed, Dirty Fighter, Tricky Fighter, Bewildering Warrior, Good or Bad Reputation, etc, I wouldn't use them in a one-on-one melee duel to the death."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ogbendog
Legendary


Joined: 29 Jul 2004
Posts: 2267

PostPosted: Sun Nov 04, 2012 1:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I didn't see Alpha in your example attacking twice.

and Beta had reach or a non-standard edge.
Give Alpha reach. (Or a bow. Or a throwing weapon.) and FS is negated.

If alpha got both attacks, his wins go up, I assume. But even if FS guy wins more often, he only wins if his foe doesn't also have reach. If his foe has reach, his edge is negated.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Zadmar
Heroic


Joined: 10 Nov 2010
Posts: 1993
Location: Munich

PostPosted: Sun Nov 04, 2012 6:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

ogbendog wrote:
I didn't see Alpha in your example attacking twice.

Just once, on round 3.

ogbendog wrote:
and Beta had reach or a non-standard edge.

Right, it's the same build I've been using throughout the thread, with First Strike and Lunge. As ValhallaGH pointed out, he could also use a spear instead of Lunge - that would lower his average damage by 0.94, but it would also free up an edge (as I said earlier, my original point was to compare "four alternative ways to get two penalty-free attacks with two edges").

ogbendog wrote:
Give Alpha reach. (Or a bow. Or a throwing weapon.) and FS is negated.

Give Alpha a spear and he also loses the benefit of Two-Fisted and Ambidextrous. Both fighters will be on equal footing.

Using ranged weapons against someone who can make melee attacks back is usually a bad idea. And if they can't hit back with melee weapons, then it turns into a ranged battle - and if both fighters are using bows then once again neither of them benefit from their edges.

ogbendog wrote:
If alpha got both attacks, his wins go up, I assume. But even if FS guy wins more often, he only wins if his foe doesn't also have reach. If his foe has reach, his edge is negated.

As I said earlier, "it's swings and roundabouts. If the Counterattack fighter had a reach weapon, the First Strike character wouldn't gain any benefit from their Edges". Each build has its pros and cons.

But the original point of my comparison was just to pit four different melee fighters against each other, and see how well they did using the weapons and tactics available to them. You can't just swap edges on the fly because you see your opponent is using a weapon you didn't expect.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ogbendog
Legendary


Joined: 29 Jul 2004
Posts: 2267

PostPosted: Sun Nov 04, 2012 10:43 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

my point is that only first strike can be negated with gear. If you have frenzied attack, or two fisted, or counter attack you can use them all the time. If you have first strike, and yor foe has a spear or staff, your edge is negated.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ValhallaGH
Legendary


Joined: 25 Apr 2010
Posts: 5911

PostPosted: Sun Nov 04, 2012 11:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

ogbendog wrote:
my point is that only first strike can be negated with gear. If you have frenzied attack, or two fisted, or counter attack you can use them all the time. If you have first strike, and yor foe has a spear or staff, your edge is negated.

M-16 with scope.

You and your fancy melee edges can suck it from 30" inches away. If you start to close, I move back and put a 3RB into your chest from Medium range. #gunbattle
_________________
"Got a problem? I've got the solution: Rocket Launcher."
"Not against a Servitor."
"... We're all gonna die."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
newForumNewName
Heroic


Joined: 22 Oct 2010
Posts: 1796
Location: Broomfield, CO

PostPosted: Sun Nov 04, 2012 11:42 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

ValhallaGH wrote:
M-16 with scope.

You and your fancy melee edges can suck it from 30" inches away. If you start to close, I move back and put a 3RB into your chest from Medium range. #gunbattle

Or:

"Got a problem? I've got the solution: Rocket Launcher." Cool
_________________
"I had a whole bunch of advice for you but got ninja'd by newForumNewName. I'd just do what he says." -- 77IM

"While nFNN could be less of a jerk about how he says what he says, what he says is essentially correct." -- ValhallaGH
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Zadmar
Heroic


Joined: 10 Nov 2010
Posts: 1993
Location: Munich

PostPosted: Sun Nov 04, 2012 3:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ogbendog wrote:
my point is that only first strike can be negated with gear. If you have frenzied attack, or two fisted, or counter attack you can use them all the time. If you have first strike, and yor foe has a spear or staff, your edge is negated.

Well technically that was my point Razz

"Counterattack is only better than First Strike if both fighters have reach weapons (rendering First Strike useless), or if the First Strike character lacks reach or has been pinned down for a long fight (so that they only get one free attack at the start of the battle).

If you just want an extra attack, Two-Fisted or Frenzy are the most reliable.
"

ValhallaGH wrote:
M-16 with scope.

My objective was to compare the relative effectiveness of four different melee builds, each using two edges to gain two penalty-free attacks. If you arm them with assault rifles, all of their edges become redundant.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Great White Games/Pinnacle Entertainment Group Forum Index -> SW General Chat & Game Stories All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Page 2 of 3

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum