Welcome

Please register for Total War Access to use the forums. If you're an existing user, your forum details will be merged with Total War Access if you register with the same email or username. For more information please read our FAQ’s here.

Categories

Buff and debuffs are in general very weak compared to damage spells.

#20320#20320 Registered Users Posts: 7
edited August 2022 in Warhammer Battle Feedback
Buffs and debuffs just don't last enough to get their value back, they could be tactical to use if they were viable. Video for proof:


Post edited by CA_Will#2514 on
«1

Comments

  • eumaies#1128eumaies#1128 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 9,514
    It's not true; it's one of Enticity's rare fails with respect to sharing useful insights to players.

    Buffs and debuffs are not very useful in grindy long fights between large units, yes.

    Buffs and debuffs are extremely useful for situations where you want to deal decisive damage fast, such as punishing a single entity or nuking a fragile unit with a deadly charging attack.

    Unlike most damage spells, buffs and debuffs cannot be dodged and are 100% reliable. They can generate excellent value relative to their counterparts when used correctly.

    Now is the transformation of Lead spell (or whatever it's name was) a good buff/debuff? No, it's pretty situational and generally not worth taking.

  • User_ClueUser_Clue Registered Users Posts: 1,572
    eumaies said:

    It's not true; it's one of Enticity's rare fails with respect to sharing useful insights to players.

    Buffs and debuffs are not very useful in grindy long fights between large units, yes.

    Buffs and debuffs are extremely useful for situations where you want to deal decisive damage fast, such as punishing a single entity or nuking a fragile unit with a deadly charging attack.

    Unlike most damage spells, buffs and debuffs cannot be dodged and are 100% reliable. They can generate excellent value relative to their counterparts when used correctly.

    Now is the transformation of Lead spell (or whatever it's name was) a good buff/debuff? No, it's pretty situational and generally not worth taking.

    I think they mention something about using them on SE. keep in mind though, that SE now have 33% more HP relative to damage, so those fights are also going to be longer. Buffs/debuffs aren't as reliable as they seem at first either. A lot of them need a unit to follow through in order to have any effect, so if you dodge the unit, you dodge the spell. Most damage spells aren't that much easier to dodge.

    There are definitely a fewf buffs and debuffs that could be more effective.
    "Daemons are abroad again, and the servants of the foul gods march south with the storm at their backs. But as the winds of magic stir, other powers rise to contest it.
    I have seen the Lady, my brothers. She came to me from the waters and told me of the trials to come. This is why I call you here, so that Her summons may be answered. I call Errantry, a crusade to strike at the heart of the new darkness"


    -- The Lionhearted
  • eumaies#1128eumaies#1128 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 9,514
    User_Clue said:

    eumaies said:

    It's not true; it's one of Enticity's rare fails with respect to sharing useful insights to players.

    Buffs and debuffs are not very useful in grindy long fights between large units, yes.

    Buffs and debuffs are extremely useful for situations where you want to deal decisive damage fast, such as punishing a single entity or nuking a fragile unit with a deadly charging attack.

    Unlike most damage spells, buffs and debuffs cannot be dodged and are 100% reliable. They can generate excellent value relative to their counterparts when used correctly.

    Now is the transformation of Lead spell (or whatever it's name was) a good buff/debuff? No, it's pretty situational and generally not worth taking.

    I think they mention something about using them on SE. keep in mind though, that SE now have 33% more HP relative to damage, so those fights are also going to be longer. Buffs/debuffs aren't as reliable as they seem at first either. A lot of them need a unit to follow through in order to have any effect, so if you dodge the unit, you dodge the spell. Most damage spells aren't that much easier to dodge.

    There are definitely a fewf buffs and debuffs that could be more effective.
    Your last statement is of course correct. But that’s not what the OP of this discussion is saying.

    And I worry about an unsupported argument becoming fake conventional wisdom.
  • Pocman#6295Pocman#6295 Registered Users Posts: 5,760
    I have to disagree with you Eumaies.



    Part of the problem is not with debuffs themselves, but the actual value given to certain effects. Like how MA and MD buffs/debuffs are several times better than WS, armor or charge bonus ones. This does not only apply for buffs and debuffs, but also abilities: The most basic MA or MD for a passive aura buff is something like 5 MA, which in the standard scenario is a constant 15% difference in melee performance. While the same effect for CB is 8% charge bonus, which even for high CB cavalry is still much worse than 5 MA/MD, and for infantry and the like is pointless.


    Also, some of the effects are either almost useless (base damage effects) or incomplete (like speed buffs and debuffs sometimes not applying to charge speed or WS buffs not increasins spash power and thus being useless if you are hitting certain infantry). Or how certain spells combine effects that can't be used at the same time, like hand of glory MA and recharge speed, or that don't really have a sinergy at all (like aspect of the dread knight giving leadership and terror).

    Not only that, even if buffs and debuffs are not dodgeable (which i don't know if it is true because you can still dodge the buffed unit, as @User_Clue says) they are still situational in the sense that they can rarely get any value unless used in lords or expensive SEMs while they are fighting other similarly expensive units.

    As a general rule, i think Enticity is right.
  • Loupi#8512Loupi#8512 Registered Users Posts: 3,779
    eumaies said:

    It's not true; it's one of Enticity's rare fails with respect to sharing useful insights to players.

    Buffs and debuffs are not very useful in grindy long fights between large units, yes.

    Buffs and debuffs are extremely useful for situations where you want to deal decisive damage fast, such as punishing a single entity or nuking a fragile unit with a deadly charging attack.

    Unlike most damage spells, buffs and debuffs cannot be dodged and are 100% reliable. They can generate excellent value relative to their counterparts when used correctly.

    Now is the transformation of Lead spell (or whatever it's name was) a good buff/debuff? No, it's pretty situational and generally not worth taking.

    yep, buffs and debuffs are an amazing kind of spell that nearly always pay off if you play well, but also allow the opponent some room to counterplay, i.e. by denying engagments. SO you have to use them properly and decisively. Even in a blob fight though they can be very effective. Enticity is very wrong on this, or perhaps he is only referring to that 1 spell.


  • saweendra#3399saweendra#3399 Registered Users Posts: 19,561
    Loupi_ said:

    eumaies said:

    It's not true; it's one of Enticity's rare fails with respect to sharing useful insights to players.

    Buffs and debuffs are not very useful in grindy long fights between large units, yes.

    Buffs and debuffs are extremely useful for situations where you want to deal decisive damage fast, such as punishing a single entity or nuking a fragile unit with a deadly charging attack.

    Unlike most damage spells, buffs and debuffs cannot be dodged and are 100% reliable. They can generate excellent value relative to their counterparts when used correctly.

    Now is the transformation of Lead spell (or whatever it's name was) a good buff/debuff? No, it's pretty situational and generally not worth taking.

    yep, buffs and debuffs are an amazing kind of spell that nearly always pay off if you play well, but also allow the opponent some room to counterplay, i.e. by denying engagments. SO you have to use them properly and decisively. Even in a blob fight though they can be very effective. Enticity is very wrong on this, or perhaps he is only referring to that 1 spell.
    Pretty sure he is talking about buff debuff spells on infantry which he is arguing can not make enough attacks for it be effective for most such spells.

    #givemoreunitsforbrettonia, my bret dlc


  • Totentanz777#2915Totentanz777#2915 Registered Users Posts: 822
    edited April 2022
    Transmutation of lead sucks but there are tons of buff and debuff spells that are amazing and better than damage spells depending on the circumstance.


    Slanessh's damage spells, for instance, are all pretty bad for their price(except the expensive one but it is relatively easy to avoid/dodge and it is expensive). But the debuffs are amazing and synergize very well with slanessh's platstyle and lore passive. I actually only take the cheap buff and debuff with Na'kari and it works very well. I cringe when I see people taking the whip spell because while it is nice for the lore passive, the damage is just trash and the cheap buff and debuff spells activate the passive as well as actually making an impact on the battlefield.
  • eumaies#1128eumaies#1128 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 9,514
    saweendra said:

    Loupi_ said:

    eumaies said:

    It's not true; it's one of Enticity's rare fails with respect to sharing useful insights to players.

    Buffs and debuffs are not very useful in grindy long fights between large units, yes.

    Buffs and debuffs are extremely useful for situations where you want to deal decisive damage fast, such as punishing a single entity or nuking a fragile unit with a deadly charging attack.

    Unlike most damage spells, buffs and debuffs cannot be dodged and are 100% reliable. They can generate excellent value relative to their counterparts when used correctly.

    Now is the transformation of Lead spell (or whatever it's name was) a good buff/debuff? No, it's pretty situational and generally not worth taking.

    yep, buffs and debuffs are an amazing kind of spell that nearly always pay off if you play well, but also allow the opponent some room to counterplay, i.e. by denying engagments. SO you have to use them properly and decisively. Even in a blob fight though they can be very effective. Enticity is very wrong on this, or perhaps he is only referring to that 1 spell.
    Pretty sure he is talking about buff debuff spells on infantry which he is arguing can not make enough attacks for it be effective for most such spells.
    Which is a good tip/ insight. But the author of this post should state that and not draw broad conclusions.
  • eumaies#1128eumaies#1128 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 9,514
    Pocman said:

    I have to disagree with you Eumaies.



    Part of the problem is not with debuffs themselves, but the actual value given to certain effects. Like how MA and MD buffs/debuffs are several times better than WS, armor or charge bonus ones. This does not only apply for buffs and debuffs, but also abilities: The most basic MA or MD for a passive aura buff is something like 5 MA, which in the standard scenario is a constant 15% difference in melee performance. While the same effect for CB is 8% charge bonus, which even for high CB cavalry is still much worse than 5 MA/MD, and for infantry and the like is pointless.


    Also, some of the effects are either almost useless (base damage effects) or incomplete (like speed buffs and debuffs sometimes not applying to charge speed or WS buffs not increasins spash power and thus being useless if you are hitting certain infantry). Or how certain spells combine effects that can't be used at the same time, like hand of glory MA and recharge speed, or that don't really have a sinergy at all (like aspect of the dread knight giving leadership and terror).

    Not only that, even if buffs and debuffs are not dodgeable (which i don't know if it is true because you can still dodge the buffed unit, as @User_Clue says) they are still situational in the sense that they can rarely get any value unless used in lords or expensive SEMs while they are fighting other similarly expensive units.

    As a general rule, i think Enticity is right.

    I don’t think enticity addressed those points.

    I do think those points are very good and accurate points - there a ton of minor buffs and debuffs on items and in the category of WS in particular that are poorly designed and ineffective.

    There are however other items that are among the best in the game that give buffs/debuffs. CA throws a lot of spaghetti a the wall and some of it sticks.
  • saweendra#3399saweendra#3399 Registered Users Posts: 19,561
    eumaies said:

    saweendra said:

    Loupi_ said:

    eumaies said:

    It's not true; it's one of Enticity's rare fails with respect to sharing useful insights to players.

    Buffs and debuffs are not very useful in grindy long fights between large units, yes.

    Buffs and debuffs are extremely useful for situations where you want to deal decisive damage fast, such as punishing a single entity or nuking a fragile unit with a deadly charging attack.

    Unlike most damage spells, buffs and debuffs cannot be dodged and are 100% reliable. They can generate excellent value relative to their counterparts when used correctly.

    Now is the transformation of Lead spell (or whatever it's name was) a good buff/debuff? No, it's pretty situational and generally not worth taking.

    yep, buffs and debuffs are an amazing kind of spell that nearly always pay off if you play well, but also allow the opponent some room to counterplay, i.e. by denying engagments. SO you have to use them properly and decisively. Even in a blob fight though they can be very effective. Enticity is very wrong on this, or perhaps he is only referring to that 1 spell.
    Pretty sure he is talking about buff debuff spells on infantry which he is arguing can not make enough attacks for it be effective for most such spells.
    Which is a good tip/ insight. But the author of this post should state that and not draw broad conclusions.
    pretty much yeah its talking about a specific interaction. honestly i am down to more moderate buffs and debuffs that last longer thats more intended for infantry vs infantry


    #givemoreunitsforbrettonia, my bret dlc


  • Bastilean#7242Bastilean#7242 Registered Users Posts: 2,945
    I agree with Pocman specifically that MA and MD tend to be vastly to superior to WS modifiers. This is very important to balance.

    I agree with the OP and Enticity that most buffs could be longer, although in my mind I would say 50% to 100% longer not +200% longer.

    Buffs in WH1 were longer and they felt better, and CA has been shaving time off of them making them feel impotent. Many are less than 20s.
  • glosskilos#4009glosskilos#4009 Registered Users Posts: 1,550
    edited April 2022
    Anyone who thinks buffs and debuffs are bad must have never used harmonic convergence or enfeebling foe. These spells are auto picks with their respective lores. Not to mention many others like itchy nuisance, cascading firecloak, phas protection, plague of rust, bironas timewarp. Bironas timewarp for example was capable of single handedly winning some matchups for lizardmen when used on saurus and temple guard. It does however seem like many of the new WH3 buffs and debuffs are not as good as those from older lores
  • User_ClueUser_Clue Registered Users Posts: 1,572
    Bastilean said:

    I agree with Pocman specifically that MA and MD tend to be vastly to superior to WS modifiers. This is very important to balance.

    I agree with the OP and Enticity that most buffs could be longer, although in my mind I would say 50% to 100% longer not +200% longer.

    Buffs in WH1 were longer and they felt better, and CA has been shaving time off of them making them feel impotent. Many are less than 20s.

    A good example of this is flesh to stone. They changed it to physical resistance which is sometimes stronger than armor, but they cut the duration down to only 40% of the original spell. FtS and the Jade shield are so short that they are only useful for avoiding catastrophic damage. They're long enough to cover you from 1-2 hits from a ranged unit, or a cavalry charge (although I'm not sure how impact damage interacts with resistance) if you time them well.

    That's not useless, but it makes them more situational and harder to use because you need to time them better than most spells so it might not even be worth the effort.
    "Daemons are abroad again, and the servants of the foul gods march south with the storm at their backs. But as the winds of magic stir, other powers rise to contest it.
    I have seen the Lady, my brothers. She came to me from the waters and told me of the trials to come. This is why I call you here, so that Her summons may be answered. I call Errantry, a crusade to strike at the heart of the new darkness"


    -- The Lionhearted
  • Lotus_Moon#2452Lotus_Moon#2452 Registered Users Posts: 12,357
    edited April 2022
    He doesnt take WOM into account and the fact they are AOE so can affect multiple units.

    He makes a lot of good videos but this one totally misses the mark.

    EDIT: I dont think transmutation of lead is a great spell but its not horrid, i think spells that hit two stats that affect the same criteria in a debuff are bad in general, reducing MA and WS is bad..becasue if you reduce MA they will hit you less already so part of that WS debuff is wasted as opposed to them making more attacks but you do pay for it likely full price in WOM cost. I think those kind of spells could be re-designed to make more sense, say reduce armour and WS so they hit you softer and are more vonrable etc. I dont get buffs that buff armour and MD also stuff like that.


    But He fails to point out that the spell has an AOE and that dmg reduction if affecting a blob or more realistically 3 units can be much bigger swing than a dmg spell that can be dodged, likewise there are lots good ones especially single target ones, why doesnt he show the effects of harmonic convergence or enfibling foe? heck itchy nusanse? or timewarp?

    He picked one of the worst AOE defbufss left in game and cast it on a single unit to try to show his points.

    Disagree with that video and i think its very missleading.

    THERE ARE however buffs/debuffs that could use a duration buff in simlar way to how lore of beast got changed or curse of anithar.
    Post edited by Lotus_Moon#2452 on
  • mightygloin#2446mightygloin#2446 Karaz-a-KarakRegistered Users Posts: 6,123
    Disagree. On top of that debuff spells also totally ignore spell resistance.
  • y4g3r#8736y4g3r#8736 Registered Users Posts: 672
    My only issue with transmutation of lead is that it does base weapon damage only. It should do ap damage as well.

    There are quite a few abilities, buffs and debuffs, that only affect base weapon/ranged damage. Makes no sense for them to be limited to a damage type when half the units in the game have majority the other type of damage. Really limits the usability of the spell or skill.
  • Asamu#6386Asamu#6386 Registered Users Posts: 1,570
    It depends a lot on the buff/debuff in question and the situation. Some are alright. Others aren't. I think, due to the change in unit sizes, most durations should probably be increased by around 30%, to better match their effective performance on large from WH2, but even then, more than half of buff/debuff spells are just bad. Melee attack debuffs for example, tend to be rather pointless (especially vs dwarfs).

    Leadership buffs are even worse, and the debuffs tend to cost too much magic to really be worth it, Weapon damage buffs are pretty much universally bad. Wyssan's wildform is probably the best, and it's still bad; the effect could probably be almost doubled for most damage buffs without them becoming OP.
    Shield of Thorns and Curse of the Leper are also not good enough atm; the damage reflect just doesn't actually do enough in practice to justify the cost. They're generally worse than harmonic convergence/enfeebling foe (which, in WH3, I still think could do with the ~30% duration buff. They weren't OP in WH2) but take more magic to cast and are less versatile.

    In general, it's way more valuable to buff melee attack or nerf melee defense than anything else, because it also increases the pace of combat, reducing damage taken by killing/routing enemy units faster, but even the durations are usually short to the point where damage spells, which can deal thousands of damage per cast or have an effect with no significant risk of being mitigated or prevented, are generally better and/or more reliable.

    Particularly vortex/explosion/wind/bombardment spells are much stronger, in the relative sense, in WH3, because the larger units and worse response times make them harder to dodge, they didn't lose any relative damage like most spells, and most of them actually got a bit stronger outright due to the change in how their damage interacts with their radius (The damage is now consistent across the entire radius, instead of being higher at the center).
    Stream of Corruption is basically as good as pendulum after the nerf, despite costing 5/8 magic instead of 13/18.
    Though, there's a good argument to nerf a lot of these spells instead of or in addition to buffing buff/debuff spells.
  • Bastilean#7242Bastilean#7242 Registered Users Posts: 2,945
    Transmutation of Lead isn't that bad honestly. I actually think it's one of the better ones. AOE, decent duration. Compare it to Stand Your Ground. 40m radius.

    Overcast isn't worth a @#$%, but the base spell is good for the -24 MA. That's impactful. Range 200m is solid.
  • Lotus_Moon#2452Lotus_Moon#2452 Registered Users Posts: 12,357
    Bastilean said:

    Transmutation of Lead isn't that bad honestly. I actually think it's one of the better ones. AOE, decent duration. Compare it to Stand Your Ground. 40m radius.

    Overcast isn't worth a @#$%, but the base spell is good for the -24 MA. That's impactful. Range 200m is solid.

    its the fact it also costs 250g to bring thats the issue, if it was a basic 50g one it be fine
  • BovineKingBovineKing Registered Users Posts: 962
    Transformation of lead is super useful vs units that already have mediocre ma works specially well for supporting class cannon units that really don’t want to peal models unnecessarily vs said units .
  • Pocman#6295Pocman#6295 Registered Users Posts: 5,760
    I think you are all overstimating the effect of buffs.


    I tested Eltharion vs Eltharion. One naked, the other with hand of glory.


    Hand of glory is one of the longer lasting cheap buff spells, at 29 seconds of duration.

    During that time, Eltharion makes from 4 to maybe 6 attacks, if he gets lucky and isn't stunned. Which literally means that hand of glory may make an extra attack land, maybe 2.

    And that was in a perfect 1v1 situation. We all know that in a real battle, characters suddenly attack lower priority targets, get lost in the mass of infantry, monsters knock their opponent, etc.

    Is literally hitting one extra attack (24 MA=24% extra hit chance) worth the spell? Imho, it doesn't.

  • Sarmatianns#6760Sarmatianns#6760 Registered Users Posts: 4,928
    How does +24 MA = 24% extra hit chance?
  • eumaies#1128eumaies#1128 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 9,514
    Pocman said:

    I think you are all overstimating the effect of buffs.


    I tested Eltharion vs Eltharion. One naked, the other with hand of glory.


    Hand of glory is one of the longer lasting cheap buff spells, at 29 seconds of duration.

    During that time, Eltharion makes from 4 to maybe 6 attacks, if he gets lucky and isn't stunned. Which literally means that hand of glory may make an extra attack land, maybe 2.

    And that was in a perfect 1v1 situation. We all know that in a real battle, characters suddenly attack lower priority targets, get lost in the mass of infantry, monsters knock their opponent, etc.

    Is literally hitting one extra attack (24 MA=24% extra hit chance) worth the spell? Imho, it doesn't.

    who uses hand of glory?

    I think anyone will stipulate that there are good buff spells and bad ones, just like there are good wind spells and bad ones.
  • eumaies#1128eumaies#1128 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 9,514
    edited April 2022
    Here's a trick, try to beat dwarf thanes with and without the skaven assassin debuffs.

    then imagine the same dynamic for units that are much more expensive and worth spending your debuffs/magic on.

  • Bastilean#7242Bastilean#7242 Registered Users Posts: 2,945

    How does +24 MA = 24% extra hit chance?

    That's literally what it does.

    Keep in mind base hit chance is 35% so all things being equal (MA = MD) 24%+35% is a big buff. 60% more dps for the duration.
  • y4g3r#8736y4g3r#8736 Registered Users Posts: 672
    Pocman said:

    I think you are all overstimating the effect of buffs.


    I tested Eltharion vs Eltharion. One naked, the other with hand of glory.


    Hand of glory is one of the longer lasting cheap buff spells, at 29 seconds of duration.

    During that time, Eltharion makes from 4 to maybe 6 attacks, if he gets lucky and isn't stunned. Which literally means that hand of glory may make an extra attack land, maybe 2.

    And that was in a perfect 1v1 situation. We all know that in a real battle, characters suddenly attack lower priority targets, get lost in the mass of infantry, monsters knock their opponent, etc.

    Is literally hitting one extra attack (24 MA=24% extra hit chance) worth the spell? Imho, it doesn't.

    You're also using it in a 1v1 scenario. Instead, say Ironguts v Ironguts. They attack faster, and most, if not all of the 16 models will be in contact with the enemy. They have a base hit chance (ignoring a charge), of 35%, since both MA and MD are 36.

    With a simple +24 ma, you're increasing the hit chance almost 70%. That's 16x your 4-6 hits that are hitting more often. That's a huge bonus and will slant the combat heavily in your favour. Buff spells are very useful 1v1, but can really do work in unit combat.
  • Pocman#6295Pocman#6295 Registered Users Posts: 5,760
    edited April 2022
    eumaies said:

    Pocman said:

    I think you are all overstimating the effect of buffs.


    I tested Eltharion vs Eltharion. One naked, the other with hand of glory.


    Hand of glory is one of the longer lasting cheap buff spells, at 29 seconds of duration.

    During that time, Eltharion makes from 4 to maybe 6 attacks, if he gets lucky and isn't stunned. Which literally means that hand of glory may make an extra attack land, maybe 2.

    And that was in a perfect 1v1 situation. We all know that in a real battle, characters suddenly attack lower priority targets, get lost in the mass of infantry, monsters knock their opponent, etc.

    Is literally hitting one extra attack (24 MA=24% extra hit chance) worth the spell? Imho, it doesn't.

    who uses hand of glory?

    I think anyone will stipulate that there are good buff spells and bad ones, just like there are good wind spells and bad ones.
    Hand of glory was just an example, which btw, has a higher than average duration. I could have used enfeebling for, which costs 6 instead of 4 and only lasts 17 seconds... that's barely 3 attacks buffed in a single entity duel.


    There are some buffs that are better than others, but as a general rule, buffs are a poor way of using WoM.
    y4g3r said:

    Pocman said:

    I think you are all overstimating the effect of buffs.


    I tested Eltharion vs Eltharion. One naked, the other with hand of glory.


    Hand of glory is one of the longer lasting cheap buff spells, at 29 seconds of duration.

    During that time, Eltharion makes from 4 to maybe 6 attacks, if he gets lucky and isn't stunned. Which literally means that hand of glory may make an extra attack land, maybe 2.

    And that was in a perfect 1v1 situation. We all know that in a real battle, characters suddenly attack lower priority targets, get lost in the mass of infantry, monsters knock their opponent, etc.

    Is literally hitting one extra attack (24 MA=24% extra hit chance) worth the spell? Imho, it doesn't.

    You're also using it in a 1v1 scenario. Instead, say Ironguts v Ironguts. They attack faster, and most, if not all of the 16 models will be in contact with the enemy. They have a base hit chance (ignoring a charge), of 35%, since both MA and MD are 36.

    With a simple +24 ma, you're increasing the hit chance almost 70%. That's 16x your 4-6 hits that are hitting more often. That's a huge bonus and will slant the combat heavily in your favour. Buff spells are very useful 1v1, but can really do work in unit combat.
    I used a 1v1 scenario because the consensus seems to be that buffs are better when used on SEs.

    In any case, 70% dps increase may seem good on paper. In practice, with a few exceptions combats between units typically last more than 1 minute. Meaning that even a longer than average buff like hand of glory would only be active for a relatively small percentage of the fight.

    Post edited by Pocman#6295 on
  • eumaies#1128eumaies#1128 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 9,514
    Pocman said:

    eumaies said:

    Pocman said:

    I think you are all overstimating the effect of buffs.


    I tested Eltharion vs Eltharion. One naked, the other with hand of glory.


    Hand of glory is one of the longer lasting cheap buff spells, at 29 seconds of duration.

    During that time, Eltharion makes from 4 to maybe 6 attacks, if he gets lucky and isn't stunned. Which literally means that hand of glory may make an extra attack land, maybe 2.

    And that was in a perfect 1v1 situation. We all know that in a real battle, characters suddenly attack lower priority targets, get lost in the mass of infantry, monsters knock their opponent, etc.

    Is literally hitting one extra attack (24 MA=24% extra hit chance) worth the spell? Imho, it doesn't.

    who uses hand of glory?

    I think anyone will stipulate that there are good buff spells and bad ones, just like there are good wind spells and bad ones.
    Hand of glory was just an example, which btw, has a higher than average. I could have used enfeebling for, which costs 6 instead of 4 and only lasts 17 seconds... that's barely 3 attacks buffed in a single entity duel.


    There are some buffs that are better than others, but as a general rule, buffs are a poor way of using WoM.
    y4g3r said:

    Pocman said:

    I think you are all overstimating the effect of buffs.


    I tested Eltharion vs Eltharion. One naked, the other with hand of glory.


    Hand of glory is one of the longer lasting cheap buff spells, at 29 seconds of duration.

    During that time, Eltharion makes from 4 to maybe 6 attacks, if he gets lucky and isn't stunned. Which literally means that hand of glory may make an extra attack land, maybe 2.

    And that was in a perfect 1v1 situation. We all know that in a real battle, characters suddenly attack lower priority targets, get lost in the mass of infantry, monsters knock their opponent, etc.

    Is literally hitting one extra attack (24 MA=24% extra hit chance) worth the spell? Imho, it doesn't.

    You're also using it in a 1v1 scenario. Instead, say Ironguts v Ironguts. They attack faster, and most, if not all of the 16 models will be in contact with the enemy. They have a base hit chance (ignoring a charge), of 35%, since both MA and MD are 36.

    With a simple +24 ma, you're increasing the hit chance almost 70%. That's 16x your 4-6 hits that are hitting more often. That's a huge bonus and will slant the combat heavily in your favour. Buff spells are very useful 1v1, but can really do work in unit combat.
    I used a 1v1 scenario because the consensus seems to be that buffs are better when used on SEs.

    In any case, 70% dps increase may seem good on paper. In practice, with a few exceptions combats between units typically last more than 1 minute. Meaning that even a longer than average buff like hand of glory would only be active for a relatively small percentage of the fight.

    Good discussion, and I am happy to use enfeebling foe as a typical example. That's not a bad return at all for 6 wom. In that period of time heavy hitter expensive characters in a one on one duel could be causing anywhere from 300 to 1000 gold value damage to each other, depending on their stats and values. And this spell could easily be the difference between 300 and 600 or 500 and 1000, with affects on both the damage you deal and the damage you take. Or cast it when you are double or triple teaming someone and their lord could straight out die. So we're talking hundreds of gold in value for a 6 wom spell. That's a very solid return.

    Losing fights also influences psychology outside of duels so if you are trying to get a unit to collapse at a key point debuffing or buffing your attacking unit serves a double purpose.
  • eumaies#1128eumaies#1128 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 9,514
    An additional factor to note is that unlike most damage spells buffs and debuffs actually affect single entities.
  • User_ClueUser_Clue Registered Users Posts: 1,572
    eumaies said:

    Pocman said:

    eumaies said:

    Pocman said:

    I think you are all overstimating the effect of buffs.


    I tested Eltharion vs Eltharion. One naked, the other with hand of glory.


    Hand of glory is one of the longer lasting cheap buff spells, at 29 seconds of duration.

    During that time, Eltharion makes from 4 to maybe 6 attacks, if he gets lucky and isn't stunned. Which literally means that hand of glory may make an extra attack land, maybe 2.

    And that was in a perfect 1v1 situation. We all know that in a real battle, characters suddenly attack lower priority targets, get lost in the mass of infantry, monsters knock their opponent, etc.

    Is literally hitting one extra attack (24 MA=24% extra hit chance) worth the spell? Imho, it doesn't.

    who uses hand of glory?

    I think anyone will stipulate that there are good buff spells and bad ones, just like there are good wind spells and bad ones.
    Hand of glory was just an example, which btw, has a higher than average. I could have used enfeebling for, which costs 6 instead of 4 and only lasts 17 seconds... that's barely 3 attacks buffed in a single entity duel.


    There are some buffs that are better than others, but as a general rule, buffs are a poor way of using WoM.
    y4g3r said:

    Pocman said:

    I think you are all overstimating the effect of buffs.


    I tested Eltharion vs Eltharion. One naked, the other with hand of glory.


    Hand of glory is one of the longer lasting cheap buff spells, at 29 seconds of duration.

    During that time, Eltharion makes from 4 to maybe 6 attacks, if he gets lucky and isn't stunned. Which literally means that hand of glory may make an extra attack land, maybe 2.

    And that was in a perfect 1v1 situation. We all know that in a real battle, characters suddenly attack lower priority targets, get lost in the mass of infantry, monsters knock their opponent, etc.

    Is literally hitting one extra attack (24 MA=24% extra hit chance) worth the spell? Imho, it doesn't.

    You're also using it in a 1v1 scenario. Instead, say Ironguts v Ironguts. They attack faster, and most, if not all of the 16 models will be in contact with the enemy. They have a base hit chance (ignoring a charge), of 35%, since both MA and MD are 36.

    With a simple +24 ma, you're increasing the hit chance almost 70%. That's 16x your 4-6 hits that are hitting more often. That's a huge bonus and will slant the combat heavily in your favour. Buff spells are very useful 1v1, but can really do work in unit combat.
    I used a 1v1 scenario because the consensus seems to be that buffs are better when used on SEs.

    In any case, 70% dps increase may seem good on paper. In practice, with a few exceptions combats between units typically last more than 1 minute. Meaning that even a longer than average buff like hand of glory would only be active for a relatively small percentage of the fight.

    Good discussion, and I am happy to use enfeebling foe as a typical example. That's not a bad return at all for 6 wom. In that period of time heavy hitter expensive characters in a one on one duel could be causing anywhere from 300 to 1000 gold value damage to each other, depending on their stats and values. And this spell could easily be the difference between 300 and 600 or 500 and 1000, with affects on both the damage you deal and the damage you take. Or cast it when you are double or triple teaming someone and their lord could straight out die. So we're talking hundreds of gold in value for a 6 wom spell. That's a very solid return.

    Losing fights also influences psychology outside of duels so if you are trying to get a unit to collapse at a key point debuffing or buffing your attacking unit serves a double purpose.
    If you take two standard fighters like Louen and Karl and hit Louen with Enfeebling foe, Karl will be about 50% more likely to hit, which only equates to ~353-470 extra damage on "average" (ignoring armor). That's not even 200 points worth of value. If they both charged before the spell then the spell provides no value or benefit. If you attack Louen with 2-3 decent melee fighters then EF won't add much benefit because Characters like that already struggle in double/triple teams or successfully separate themselves with attack animations. EF won't change that situation. In that case you didn't earn the value from EF, you earned value by surrounding something with expensive fighters.

    For 2 winds more you can hit Louen with a sprit leech for 938 guaranteed damage which is 2-3 times better and you don't need to invest in goon squads to throw at Louen or risk also getting hit in the process.
    "Daemons are abroad again, and the servants of the foul gods march south with the storm at their backs. But as the winds of magic stir, other powers rise to contest it.
    I have seen the Lady, my brothers. She came to me from the waters and told me of the trials to come. This is why I call you here, so that Her summons may be answered. I call Errantry, a crusade to strike at the heart of the new darkness"


    -- The Lionhearted
Sign In or Register to comment.