Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="KarinsDad" data-source="post: 4495522" data-attributes="member: 2011">By an average of one point of damage. IF used against 3 opponents (for that example). IF the opportunity still exists. IF a different power would not have killed one of the opponents on the first round. If, if, if, ...The problem with setting up for multiple attacks on a following round is that the game is too fluid for it to be worth your while.This is similar to the Illusory Ambush discussions. A lot of people think that giving -2 to an enemy for it's next round is cool too. And, it is cool sounding.But if you look at the math, Illusory Ambush is inferior to some of the other single target Wizard At Will powers, especially Cloud of Daggers.4E is all about action economy which means that it is all about damage per round. Offense over defense. Don't let people convince you otherwise.The faster you can take out opponents, the quicker your side gets more actions per round than the opposition.A future buff (or debuff) action on the next round is more likely to be inferior to a more damaging action this round (on average). Especially if that buff assumes that the attacker will definitely get 3 or more attacks in that round (which your version of Sure Strike requires for "a payoff").You know, I am convinced that you always take the opposing POV from me just to argue. I cannot ever recall a time when you and I ever agreed. And you call me wrong, etc. without ever supporting your POV with math, just hyperbole.This is totally an Apples and Oranges comparison:1) Righteous Brand is + Str Mod. A first level Cleric who wants to be offensive will often have a 16 Str. +3 to hit for the next round is superior to +2 to hit for the next round. And as the Cleric advances levels, it becomes +4, +5, etc.2) Righteous Brand gives the bonus to any ally (like the multi-attack Ranger), not just the Fighter. Tactically, this is huge. Each ally in a combat can use it with a Daily power to up his odds by 15% or more.3) Righteous Brand does 1[W] + Str mod damage. Your Sure Strike does 1[W] damage.4) The only advantages your Sure Strike has are a) it is +2 to hit (but it still averages less damage per round than Righteous Brand just for the attack itself), and b) it happens even if Sure Strike misses.So, your conclusion is faulty. Just because Righteous Brand is a great power does not mean that your version of Sure Strike is a great power. This is totally faulty logic.Using your own words, "You could not be more wrong.".Your Sure Strike does not significantly increase the damage of Secondary Attack powers on the second round enough to counter the lesser damage of round one. Average damage for those two rounds is about the same (typically within one point of damage).Your version of Sure Strike is only really worthwhile (i.e. better than other Fighter alternatives) when the second round attack is against 3 or more opponents. Most Fighter powers and most combat situations do not allow for that. Hence, there are extremely few opportunities for "a payoff".Yes, your version of Sure Strike is good against minions. Course, Cleave is better against minions since it will average 10 minions killed in round one in 10 encounters whereas your Sure Strike will only average 6 minions killed in round one in 10 encounters. Your version will average more in round two used with a multi-attack power, but again, the problem is action economy.Note: Your version of Sure Strike does sound cool. It just has extremely limited utility.</blockquote>

Verification