Help me decide between DM and AMF... (in General)

Talion March 21 2007 9:10 AM EDT

So, should I train DM or AMF?

I have a new NCB starting soon. Here is the single minion strat I am adopting:

Equipped: ToE, AoM, EBs, EGs, HoC, AxBow (big +), BoTH (big x), Seeker Bolts

HP: 2/5 of total XP
ST: 1/5 of total XP
DX: 1/5 of total XP
BL: 1/5 of ST

and finally...

DM or AMF : (1/5 of Total XP) - (BL XP)

I was leaning towards DM because I think my biggest problem will be GA backlash.

Please don't try to sell me a ToA strat. I want to try something different and I have been testing different strats for a while (see my Impaler non-NCB char). The above strat will work very well. But I haven't seen much difference between training DM or AMF. That is what I need feedback on.

Lumpy Koala March 21 2007 9:13 AM EDT

AMF is a much better choice... GA is nothing compared to what FB can do to you...

Kong Ming March 21 2007 9:19 AM EDT

Since you are using a ToE and axbow, I presume you want to last till melee to finish the job. So AMF would be a better choice.

QBRanger March 21 2007 9:26 AM EDT

In general DM is best used in a "quick kill" strategy such as a FB/MM mage type team or an ELB TOA tank.

AMF is best if your bypassing doing serious damage in missile rounds and focus on melee. With the TOE, GA damage will be quite minimal and you can disperse the FB damage to manageable amounts using AMF.

There is no real discussion in your case---AMF is the preferred spell.

Another bonus you will get using AMF is the ability to use Ethereal Chains along with the AMF. Since you are a TOE tank, your dex will be generally less then those of TOA tanks.

I realize you are a single minion now, but in the future you may want to hire more minions and the ability to use EC is a nice benefit. If you choose DM, the ability to use EC is generally lost without using a ROS (which you are not doing).

Talion March 21 2007 9:30 AM EDT

AMF 3 : DM 0

Seems like the choice will be simple after all. Very good advice everyone. Thanks!

Keep'em coming. I am curious to see if anyone will argue for DM.

QBsutekh137 March 21 2007 10:19 AM EDT

DM has the advantage of fighting all teams that use defensive enchantments, whether they be mage teams, tanks, or passive-damage teams.

The problem with that is, a little bit of DM goes nowhere. You need to neutralize everything, especially the GA.

On the other hand, incremental amounts of AMF help out right away, and at higher levels can even kill opposing damage dealers (but only on mage teams).

So while I have made a point for DM, I have also pretty much stated that I would use AMF if I were you. *smile*

Talion March 21 2007 3:54 PM EDT

AMF 4 : DM 0

That is a very good point. I think the reason I haven't been seeing much difference between AMF and DM is that Impaler only has an MPR of 26K. So my DM has been pretty efficient because is still makes a difference. But I understand your point about it becoming insignificant at higher levels. Also, I will have to use EC at a higher level, so using DM makes even less sense.

I will go with AMF. Thanks again everyone.

QBsutekh137 March 21 2007 6:25 PM EDT

I'm not sure I would call DM insignificant at higher levels, you just need to really invest in it. Like Hubbell:

Dave cast Dispel Magic on all enemy Minions (2,578,021)

THAT'S a helpful DM. *smile*

QBJohnnywas March 21 2007 7:09 PM EDT

"But I haven't seen much difference between training DM or AMF."

Small doses of either and you won't see much difference. I've found that AMF at small levels only really protects against DM. And to be big enough to really make a difference to a fight AMF needs to be really big.

The real question here is do you need either spell? A ToE tank, especially a single minion is going to have a lot of xp dilution. A single tank with a ToA can be difficult enough.

I've run my last two teams without any enchantments of any kind. And do you know what? Both have been pretty successful. And both had a lot of mages on the fightlist; pretty big mages.

You're going to be using seekers and a ToE. Personally I think that will be a pretty good defense against mages. I'd try without either DM or AMF for a while and see how it goes. If it doesn't work out well enough you could always start building it later....

QBJohnnywas March 21 2007 7:10 PM EDT

"I've found that AMF at small levels only really protects against DM."

sorry I meant to say decay. DM on the brain! ;)

Tyriel [123456789] March 21 2007 7:19 PM EDT

If it's going to be small, AMF is best. Decay is absolutely killer without some kind of AMF. Even my tank-killer strat has some AMF to defend against decay.

DM doesn't do very much when it's small. Since you won't be putting much experience into it, AMF is most likely the way to go.

That's generally the way I see AMF vs DM. Strategy-specific, AMF is more useful to your strategy because 1) it's defensive and 2) decay will hurt.

Talion March 21 2007 8:57 PM EDT

To respond to sutekh137, I meant that DM becomes insignificant at higher levels... if you cannot invest lots of XP into it (like it will be the case for me). Apologies for not being clear enough.

After reading all the argumentation, I think exactly like Tyriel: AMF is almost a "must have" against Decay when you are a single minion tank, especially with a ToE strat. And even if AMF doesn't do much against other DD spells with lots of XP, every little bit helps. Also, my goal is to stay alive until I can start using my BoTH. Then the fun begins...
This thread is closed to new posts. However, you are welcome to reference it from a new thread; link this with the html <a href="/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=0023oN">Help me decide between DM and AMF...</a>