Rate my Randimar's Rarities

I am done. I hope other people can see how insane your arguments are for themselves.

 

Beat me to it.

Since Infused Greatclub is a very common item let's use it for a math experiment comparing a chained attack of Bludgeon followed by Obliterating Bludgeon since this is a reasonable combo to see in a game and the type of combo which would qualify under what has been in the above discussion. Assuming less than full health...
Bloodied Block triggers on:
Bludgeon 100%, Obliterating Bludgeon 0%, (neither 0%) for an expected value of health saved of 4 hp
Desperate Block triggers on:
Bludgeon 0%, Obliterating Bludgeon 50%, (neither 50%) for an expected value of health saved of 8.5 hp

Ector, you always claim to be a good deck builder but a bad player; without affirming or denying your claim, by your own admission shouldn't you accept an argument about what is good gameplay from someone else since that's where you claim to be weak? Or at the very least concede that a regular MP player like Peonprop does indeed have more empirical knowledge on how human opponents tend to respond in game situations?

 

I will gladly discuss this in the separate thread, if you wish, but not here.

No I shouldn't. Since even the bad player like me sees the obvious holes in his logic, then the logic must be really faulty.

 

If I just played Team Run to move next to a wizard and the wizard does not respond by moving away or moving my guys away from him, then I assume that either he has no means to escape and I can take my time or that he has defense (blocks/toughness) and wants me to waste attacks, or both. Either way I attack with my smallest attack first. But that's just me.

But that's my point, discussing player tendencies has nothing to do with logic about how a player should play (which if you want to argue that I accept that people can have differing opinions), but has everything to do with what players actually do in MP play. You may think in a given situation player A should do X, you may even be right, but if someone else who has played way more against player A says in that situation they usually do Y then it's illogical to dismiss their knowledge.

 

Not just you, that's standard practice. If a wizard remains toe-to-toe with a warrior it's because they're out of options or they have blocks.

 

Or the player analyzed cards and knows that the opposing warrior has less than 14 attacks in his deck, so he is safe.

 

Although generally opening with the weaker attack is better to draw out blocks, sometimes you'll want to take the risk when you get an opening. For example, I Team Run my warrior next to an enemy wizard. I can see that he can escape with anther move, but he tries to Telekinesis my warrior away instead. My Defender's Block triggers, and lets my warrior stay in place. Now, do I use my weak attack? Or my strong attack? If I am really struggling to get an attack in, I'd probably risk the strong attack.

 

That's a case where the wizard tried to create distance, though.

 

Bloodied Block at less than full health boosts any roll +4 resulting in a roll of 5 or greater for anything and triggering the block so it should be:
Bludgeon 100%, Obliterating Bludgeon 0%, for an expected value of health saved of 4 hp

Makes the difference even more apparent. Bloodied Block is more useful when you draw it right before receiving a lethal attack, but that is the only time it's better.

 

Well, it always blocks, so there's one other scenario in which it's much better than Desperate Block:

• Assume your opponent has no AoE or multitarget attacks.
• Assume you're running a pseudo draw build.

In this scenario, Bloodied Block always trades 1-for-1 with an opponent's card, which is very good when you're up on cards.

...

 

You're correct, I mis-remembered the values for it; will edit.

 

Another situation arises when you just reach two chars with the same Team Run. The opponent cannot run away with two chars in one turn, and you have ONE chance to hit the enemy char before he runs away. Everybody would risk a strong attack in such situation.
There are many other situations where everybody would risk a strong attack. In fact, my opponents are considering only the ideal situation. You have both the weak and the strong attacks, you don't have Mass Frenzy (if you do, the "weak attack" will trigger Desperate Block too), you don't have to fear being killed/bashed away/Elven Trickeried/whatever after your weak attack, enemy char isn't going to run away/get Nimbus after your weak attack, and he isn't at full health (if he is, Bloodied Block is unlikely to trigger on the weak attack, but will 100% trigger on the next one). Why would the opponent play like that? Just to prove that peonprop was right?
The real game almost never presents such ideal situations. You have to play whatever attacks you've got when the enemy warrior chases you, if you don't like yielding the victory area or be killed. If you have three strong attacks in your hand, you aren't going to wait for the weak attack, you just rush to the enemy! And there are many "weak" attacks that do a little damage, but a serious harm, like Boiling Armor.

 

Our "ideal situations" happen all the time. Your corner cases, which don't even apply for the most part, are the true specimens of spherical horses. Just for the record, I never claimed Desperate Block and Bloodied Block are superior to Wounded Block and Duck. I never even said those two were bad blocks. All I said was that Wounded Block and Duck are not as good as they appear on paper and I personally prefer Bloodied Block and Desperate Block. I and many others have been dissatisfied with both of them and no longer play them. Take that into account when you are deciding on purchasing the skill. This is all simply advice, not some sort of ultimatum.

I have never seen you play but I'm beginning to suspect that you're supposed bad player rap is based on an inability to change your play style based on actual games. You cling to your theories that are right no matter what and if you see something to the contrary you pass it off as a fluke. When I first started playing I would use strong attacks on wizards all the time before they could dash off. Then, my attacks on wizards started hitting a Parry here, a Toughness there, and I fully admit I once gave an Obliterating Bludgeon away to a Duck. You need to stop being stubborn and learn from your mistakes.

 

Oh come on. Do you have both weak and strong attacks all the time? Do you never have Mass Frenzy while almost everybody is playing it? Does your opponent always play a sitting duck allowing you to play all your attacks? I will never believe that.

That's wrong advice, so it's worse than nothing.

No, I'm a bad player because I am thinking slowly and often have no patience to think when needed.

If you really think that not using strong attacks vs. wizards when you can attack only once before they run away is "a mistake", then you should "stop being stubborn", not me. A wizard cannot have a lot of blocks unless he plays the special staves, which you're going to notice pretty soon. If he has no such staves, he can have 2-3 blocks/Toughness maximum from the skills. Losing OB to a Duck isn't silly, it's just taking a reasonable risk but losing. Playing a weak attack instead of OB when you can hit only once is really silly.

 

By that logic you should swing into a melee character with your strongest attack every time because they usually only have 3 blocks.

 

No, I shouldn't. The decision which attack to play if you have both weak and strong attack is one of the hardest decisions you make in the game. A lot of factors should be taken into account, and I usually fail to make the right decision in time, alas.

 

There is no decision. If you run up to a character and it does nothing or attacks you use your weak attack. Why would anyone without blocks not run away and allow you to attack them?

 

Here's the deal, I am tired of constantly being told I am wrong by one player whose opinion I frankly do not respect. If anyone else thinks what I said originally is wrong, that Bloodied Block and Duck are worse than they appear and that I personally would not buy Bloody Stoutness, I will remove that post. If I am so unbelievably wrong that I can't see it for myself please let me know. I do not intentionally give out wrong advice. This applies to anything else I post in the future too.

 

Bloody Stoutness has Bloodied Block, not Wounded Block, so I am confused why we are even talking about Wounded Block.