Lord Lance wrote:Ehi Zadmar, may I ask you a favor?
Could you make a simulated fight with your simulator? Giving Warrior A standard Stats (something about d8 everywhere, a modifier of +2 to attack, and a modifier of -2 to parry, while Warrior B should be the same of A, but the modifiers are +2 to damage, and -2 to parry.
I'd like to test a sort of "limited power wild attack", giving a choice to my players: Wild Attack for Power (+2 to Damage, -2 to Parry), or Wild Attack for Hit (+2 to Hit, -2 to Parry). I feel that +2 to Hit is more powerful than +2 to Damage, however I'd like to see 100000 simulated fights...
You're right, which is why if you look at Savage Armoury, I rate +1 attack as 3 points and +1 damage as 2 points. Thus +2 damage vs +2 attack is:
There were 100000 fights. Damage won 44143 of them, while Attack won 55857.
While +3 damage vs +2 attack is:
There were 100000 fights. Damage won 49155 of them, while Attack won 50845.
Lord Lance wrote:If you can, please make another wave of fights with heavy armored warriors (3 Armor), or with high parry (+2 maybe for a shield and a rapier)?
Both have 3 armour, +2 damage vs +2 attack:
There were 100000 fights. Damage won 46650 of them, while Attack won 53350.
Both have 3 armour, +3 damage vs +2 attack:
There were 100000 fights. Damage won 52822 of them, while Attack won 47178.
Both get heavy shields (in additional to 3 armour):
There were 100000 fights. Damage won 39289 of them, while Attack won 60711.
Same but this time +3 damage instead of +2:
There were 100000 fights. Damage won 44915 of them, while Attack won 55085.
Redtwin wrote:Hmm. Now that I think about it, wild attacking with a sword and shield is far better than a regular attack with a two hander.
A longsword on its own is better than a two-handed sword, longsword with shield is much better. And you're almost always better off using wild attack in a one-on-one fight to the death.