Nice analysis... how would both fare againt 1/3 defense ? What about 1/4 ?
I also prefer the Mages 2/1 defense than Archers 1/2. How to evaluate the "get a command card" ability too ? Also more dice means a greater chance of getting lucky... something hard to put in math.
I'll email my math crunching friend and see what he thinks. Its certainly a compelling argument against mages.
See, I think it's a purely contextual argumet. The mages are fantastic in tons of cases, I love them to death. But
this particular army has a real lack of damage sources. In that specific case, I've got to go with the archers.
The math, since you're interested, turns out to be that against anything with exactly 1 defense, the two units will do the same amount of damage (because 5 dice hitting on 4's is the same result as 4 dice hitting on 5's.) Adding one die (via Attack Storm or the like) tilts the balance back in favor of the Archers, as does Might or even Strike. Force obviously keeps them even since they still have the same number of dice vs. defense 1. Only Accuracy benefits the mages more.
(Archers are also more damaging at longer ranges because that pushes most units back into the space where they have an edge: while archers and mages are equal without cards against a 1/x at close range, the archers do better at long range.)
Again, I don't think either is a bad unit, or overcosted. It just depends on the needs of the army. Some armies want a flexible damage or card engine, especially ones featuring bowriders where you often want to be able to make up the cards you lose to DCing the bowriders to mess with people. But this specific army badly wants to break through lines, so I'd go with the damage in this specific case.