37
« on: February 11, 2016, 02:09:19 PM »
Thoughts on attacking - triggered by the question why I dislike Chitin armor so much
I can fully appreciate the joy and aestethics of a nice builder strategy - a healthy, benevolent set-up, not meddling with the opponent's affairs and simply waiting for him to realize how futile his attempts are and then accept his resignation - a gentleman's way of winning.
I like to kill quickly, I like to harass my opponent, I like to mess up his plans, I like to focus my damage on the mage, I prefer attacking to defending - and that's why I love to play aggrssive styles.
What I would like this thread to be is a place for aggressive players to share thoughts about openings, attacking ideas or general thoughts on that topic.
At the current state of the game I think attacking is an uphill battle but I also think that this is how it should be - it just shouldn't be too steep.
Just my thoughts and experiences on that matter :
1. Opening situation : Attacker vs Builder
I refer to turns 1 to 3 or 4 as the opening phase of the game.
It takes about 3 to 4 turns to establish relevant contact with your opponent.
An aggressive player needs that much time to close-in and develop a serious threat.
A defensive builder must reckon with a aggressive player and therefore must be ready to defend appropiately.
Opening situation when an attacker meets a builder around turn 3/4 :
Attacker :
- has a creature (probably better and more expensive than the builder)
- invested probably at least one action into a double-movement to close-in quickly and save mana.
- 1-2 minor support spells, e.g. one hidden enchantment
Builder:
- has a creature (probably defensive-ish in nature; a good guard or all-rounder)
- invested all actions into infrastructure and has at least 1 spawnpoint (additional channeling + action)
The necessity to spend time closing-in and less infrastructure based spells are the reason why aggressive play will have a growing disadvantage the longer the game goes - but that's deal:
You either kill quickly or you don't kill at all.
2. Midgame
This is where an aggressive spellbook wants to decide the game and kill. Shouldn't last longer than turn 10.
That's where things get tricky - really tricky. Margin of error is quite small here.
So, what does an attacker has to deal with ?
----- 1st defensive measure : Guards
In general my impression is that it is easy for an attacker to efficiently deal with defending creatures. There are many ways to get rid of guards. Nevertheless it is important to note that dealing with guards cost actions and mana and must be done - it is a necessity.
----- 2nd defensive measure : Damage reduction, defense and healing
In order to deal the required 30+ damage to the opponent mage, one also has to break through the mage's defense, too.
This is where I think that the game probably tips out of balance towards the defender (and where "Chitin Armor" (promo) would have a negative impact).
why is that ?
First, let's look at the raw numbers of different stacking slots and possibilites (permanents, one-off heals excluded)
Core (that is what you can expect from any deck; probably with multiple copies):
Armor +2
Gloves +1
Boots +1
Breeches +1
Belt anti-crit dmg
Cloak +1
Enchantment +2
Regeneration +2 heal/turn
-> sums up to 8 armor, 2 regen/turn and crit dmg conversion
All are very cheap and cost 6 or less mana !
Additional possibilites:
Aegis -1 dice
Defense equipment
Defense enchantment
Second, let's look how aggressive decks can deal with that :
a) Ignore the armor. Direct damage curses like [mwcard=MW1E24]Magebane[/mwcard], [mwcard=MW1E19]Ghoul Rot[/mwcard] and conditions like Tainted, Burn.
Very good but limited in availability.
or
b) Deal with the armor. And here is where the game might tip too much out of balance.
+++ Pierce : some creatures and weapons have pierce but usually only 1 maybe 2 and that simply is not relevant.
+++ Destroy the armor : This doesn't work. A defender will always be able to outequip you at the moment. Why?
1. Thanks to his infrastructure he has an action and mana advantage, which he all can invest into getting up his defense. The attacker has to save actions for attack and is left with usually 1 quickcast or maybe -if he chooses to not attack- with a 2nd spell (but he doesn't attack then !)
Attacker : 1-2 actions to deal with defense
Defender : spawnpoint action (new guarding creature or equip) + 2 actions to equip defense.
2. "The hidden enchantment"-problem
Your opponent has an armor that you would like to [mwcard=MW1I07]Dissolve[/mwcard] and a hidden enchantment on him. This definitely has to be expected to be a [mwcard=MW1E29]Nullify[/mwcard], which means you either can take the risk to waste most of your turn's mana and your only action to do nothing but get countered or you invest even more actions (which you don't really have) or you wait and accept that the armor stays.
The problem is more complex because it could also be [mwcard=MW1E36]Rhino Hide[/mwcard] or [mwcard=MW1E32]Regrowth[/mwcard].
Which card do you prepare ? Worst case is you decide it's a Nullify, but then it is a Rhino or Regen. So instead of +2 Armor your opponent suddenly has +4 or regenerates next turn = gg
3. Armor comes from different card types (related to Nr.2).
The action advantage and various different card type armor sources (enchantment or equipment or condition marker) mean that spells used to attack must do more than simply remove armor - they must make up for the action disadvantage and be flexible.
-> I think we need a spell that removes armor no matter if coming from an enchantment or artifact (aka Corrode or Rust).
+++ Reduce the armor : What do we have ?
[mwcard=MWSTX2FFE07]Rust[/mwcard] -2
Corrode condition (relevant sources [mwcard=DNA01]Acid Ball[/mwcard] and [mwcard=DNC03]Devouring Jelly[/mwcard] because they also do more than just removing armor. They deal damage and remove armor regardless of source.)
That's it.
...
...
...
-2 (!) and maybe some corrodes vs. +8 and additional effects.
Having an armor that has -3 Acid (source of corrodes) is problematic at the moment (Chitin Armor promo) in my opinion.
Note that we haven't even dealt with the threat of Healing and Defenses.
As an attacker you have to have answers to both, which usually are reduced to [mwcard=MW1E31]Poisoned Blood[/mwcard], [mwcard=MW1J19]Deathlock[/mwcard] and [mwcard=FWE03]Falcon Precision[/mwcard]. I think these options are sufficient though but one must be aware of the timing and prevent healing early.
In my opinion even though this also is "just another thing one has to deal with" I don't have the impression it's a problem.
----- 3rd defensive measure : Run away.
Straightforward. Problem is it also costs actions to follow / get to him but ok.
->
Conclusion on the armor topic : There are not enough efficient anti-armor concepts/spells around. The only 2 relevant concepts are Rust (can be played any time, works against armor from any source) and Corrode (armor must already be present, works against armor from any source).
Note that some Mages have innate defensive abilities that are very useful for defense :
Wizard : ignore 3 dmg each turn
Priestess : immune to conditions (corrode)
Dwarf : difficult to get rid of his equipment
3. Endgame
This is the "Here be dragons" unknown realm.
It shouldn't be relevant for an aggressive player. This is where [mwcard=MW1Q19]Mage Wand[/mwcard] rules or weird 20+ mana creatures amass.
This is where Keynes' "In the long run...." scenarios are part of the discussion about the outcome of a game; e.g. "In the long run I win because I have an eternal servant
[mwcard=DNC19]Venomous Zombie[/mwcard] that inflicts unlimited Tainted markers over time and cannot be killed (if my [mwcard=MW1Q19]Mage Wand[/mwcard] with [mcard=MWSTX1CKI01]Drain Soul[/mwcard] isn't enough)."
You spellbook and strategy has nothing to do with this phase of the game.
4. The nature of an aggressive spellbook
You need a solution for every situation. You need the best solution for every situation.
It doesn't matter how much spellbook points the spells cost. In the end if your spellbook only has 30 cards it doesn't matter - the game lasts less than 10 turns anyway. If it doesn't you probably already lost.
Thx for reading.
Show Posts
). Great times...15-20 years ago though. 
