That one is quite simple.
As you know, you get a "sureshot" if you have twice or more the attack of your opponent.
Hence, in a round with 2 cards with equals powers, if you put one pillz when your opponent doesnt put anything: you get a sureshot At the cost of only 1 pillz, it's worth it, no?
This one pillz can be very powerfull
@ Karanx on post 25
what you're saying is "not true" in rooms wherein random is disabled..that is..unless you're talking about a random environment wherein having either "different" or the "same" amount of pillz for you and your opponent (so long as sureshot is not triggered) affects winning due to chances..(i.e. higher attack doesn't always win)..but either way, what you're saying is pure opinion and not backed up by reality..
please read the game's rules, specially those sections wherein "attacks" are discussed in brief, step-tutorials for beginners (so you'll know what random is and how it affects attacks and how attacks are computed), and other posts here in the "strategy and tactics" section before posting something that is not supported by facts..
The first pill is the most important pill, yes? Because 1 pill is doubling the attack, while 2 is tripling, only a 50% improvement from 2. Each additional pill after than is a diminishing return, in relative terms. In absolute terms of course each pill adds the same amount to attack.
I really love this thread Thanks to this, everyone faces my Montana + Hugo deck using just 1 pill to bait with, and auto-loses at ELO. It's all most amusing. Of course, longer-term players often see past my 'devious' planning...ha. However, in Type 2 Hugo + Montana + Don + Murphy = 0 pills spent, and 2 potential threats of 8 damage...playing a card with 1 pill seems somewhat risky now eh?