Arcane Wonders Forum
Mage Wars => Strategy and Tactics => Topic started by: sIKE on April 07, 2014, 04:33:46 PM
-
I have read many times over the last couple of years about it is not worth it to cast one of these, as it "Takes 5 rounds to get the mana you spent back and the games don't last that long". Other than falling to a hyper aggressive mage by not seeing it coming and preparing properly, this should not be the case.
Typically you will read this to: "The better mages channel 10 instead of 9 mana". In some ways this perception is a result of the statement above.
Why is that you may ask?
While, it is true that these will cost you five mana and a Quick Action to cast, I believe that they are worth much more than the 5 mana that they will generate over the 5 game rounds it will take for them to pay for themselves by providing action efficiency each round via the higher channeling and the doors this opens. By casting one or two of these you have increased your channeling by one or two each round. I know this is an obvious point, but keep reading. I am going to focus for this theory craft, on the Warlord here as this topic was brought up last in Laddinfance build a book thread.
With both Flowers cast, you don’t have to wait every other round to get out a mid-level creature like a [mwcard=FWC01] Dwarf Kriegsbiel [/mwcard] or [mwcard=MWSTX1CKC07] Dwarf Panzergarde [/mwcard] each cost 11 mana. This means that in three rounds with two flowers cast and with no [mwcard=FWJ03] Barracks [/mwcard] have two nice level 3 creatures and the ability for next 3 rounds to get two more out, along with a [mwcard=MW1Q06] Dragonscale Hauberk [/mwcard] and Morning Star. You could not do the same with Barracks as it cost 12 mana plus one or two more Outposts and then another round to Channel up. However, I do like the Barracks so I would choose to cast it out on round 2 along with the Dragonscale Hauberk. On round 3 I would summon my other two low cost Outposts. So come round 4, I am now able to bring out every round one of the following creatures: [mwcard=MWSTX1CKC01] Bridge Troll [/mwcard], [mwcard=FWC07] Grimson Deadeye, Sniper [/mwcard], Bloodcrag Minotaur, or [mwcard=MW1C06] Brogan Bloodstone [/mwcard]. As you can see, the enhancement of the increased channeling opens avenues to your mage that otherwise you couldn’t afford each round. With 9 channeling and a Barracks you are limited each round to less favorable creature selections. With a Hype aggressive build, I would summon a Dwarf Kriegsbiel or a [mwcard=MWSTX1CKC06] Guardian Angel [/mwcard] early and let it blunt the Agro Mages charge while continuing to build on the above strategies. Soon enough with a little preparation you will be spewing out creatures and gain the action advantage on the agro mage and take him down.
The only other point I have is the classic [mwcard=MW1J13] Mana Flower [/mwcard] vs. [mwcard=MW1J12] Mana Crystal [/mwcard] which one should I pick question. Other than the Warlord (and maybe the Nature mages if my spell points are very tight) I always go with the Crystal. Flame based damage is a such vulnerability in game that I value the Flame Immunity trait of the Crystal over the Regenerate 2 trait of the Flower even for the Nature mages.
To make one of these work you have to cast them very early in the game, after round two, it is probably too late. I always cast these out round one, that way I can have them bumping my Channeling from the very start of the game. Other than that I don't do much to protect them other than "if" a friendly creature is in the same zone and I want it to stay there for whatever reason, I will put it on guard.
I hope this helps when you are planning your spellbooks!
-
You are so wrong. Your examples are bad. You gives an example with 2 flowers and 0 barrack vs an example of 0 flowers and 1 barracks. We are not comparing flowers to barrack. We compare flowers to no flowers.
So give example were you cast 2 flowers and 1 barrack vs 0 flowers and 1 barrack OR 2 flowers and no barrack vs no flowers and no barrack.
All your flower examples are doable without them. As long as you do not reach the 7th round, flower or no flower, mana amount you have is the same.
You only get a mana advantage on the 7th round.
-
You are so wrong. Your examples are bad. You gives an example with 2 flowers and 0 barrack vs an example of 0 flowers and 1 barracks. We are not comparing flowers to barrack. We compare flowers to no flowers.
So give example were you cast 2 flowers and 1 barrack vs 0 flowers and 1 barrack OR 2 flowers and no barrack vs no flowers and no barrack.
All your flower examples are doable without them. As long as you do not reach the 7th round, flower or no flower, mana amount you have is the same.
You only get a mana advantage on the 7th round.
The intent of this article was not to throw darts at the Barracks but to illustrate that the increased channeling provided by the Flower or Crystal is more than just a linear equation over a period of 5 rounds that is then paid for. I apparently have done a poor job.
The payoff is immediate the next round, when you can "afford" the more expensive items (that I wish to cast) sooner rather than struggling to save mana between two rounds to enable me to cast a costly spell. Yes, there is a small upfront sacrifice to tempo when starting, but when you are out in rounds 2-5 you will not be anywhere as mana starved as you would of been channeling just 9 mana a round.
-
The payoff is immediate the next round, when you can "afford" the more expensive items (that I wish to cast) sooner rather than struggling to save mana between two rounds to enable me to cast a costly spell. Yes, there is a small upfront sacrifice to tempo when starting, but when you are out in rounds 2-5 you will not be anywhere as mana starved as you would of been channeling just 9 mana a round.
I think you need to compare spending the 10 mana to cast the two Flowers or crystals with not casting anything at all, instead. The question is... "is it worth it?"
If you cast these two, you spend 10 mana (8-9 for Crystals with Arcane Ring). Instead, you could choose to not spend that mana, and have it immediately available to build those five 11 mana creatures that you were desiring. It looks like this (excluding other misc. spells cast):
Start with 19 mana (presumed)
Round 1 = Cast two flowers -10 mana, +2 channeling; End mana = 9
Round 2 = Cast 11 mana creature - 9 mana (net); End mana = 9
Round 3 = Cast 11 mana creature - 9 mana (net); End mana = 9
Your total mana available to cast two additional quick spells in rounds 2 and 3 is 9.
Compared with:
Start with 19 mana (presumed)
Round 1 = Cast 11 mana creature - 11 mana; End mana = 8
Round 2 = Cast 11 mana creature - 11 mana; End mana = 6
Round 3 = Cast nothing; End mana = 15
You get four additional quick spells costing 15 mana or less in these three rounds also, compared with two additional quick spells costing only 9 mana or less, all while getting your creatures out more quickly.
It seems better in the short term to not cast the flowers, but to bring out the other spells that you desire instead. You don't pay the opportunity cost of the flowers and lose mana early on that way, and you perhaps do not lose tempo doing this.
In the long run, if the flowers or crystals survive, you will have built up enough mana to overcome the short-term mana shortfall.
I'm just playing Devil's Advocate here, though. I prefer to have one or two mana generators out on the board and/or having my mage harmonized and/or wearing an amulet for additional mana, rather than not having any of these things.
-
This is correct, you give up a bit of tempo in the short run (round one), but now you are casting 11 mana creatures each round vs. getting a out a couple of creature up front but then loosing tempo later as you are having to save mana over two round to be able to cast a creature or spell higher than your default channeling rate. Matter in fact you can not only bring out an 11 mana cost dwarf each round, but you also can spend some of your extra mana (you will have 9) getting at least one or two pieces of armor on.
-
I don't know how you do maths. But you do not lose anything by not casting Flower/Crystal until 7th round.
With Flowers/No Flowers:
Round 1: 9 (19 - 2x5)/19
2: 20/28
3: 31/37
4: 42/46
5: 53/55
6: 64/64 (there the amount of mana gained is equal)
7: 75/73
8: 86/82
Etc.
You cant compare them by saying "I can cast a lvl 11 creature every round, while the guy with no flower cant do that after he spent his initial mana on something else".
No matter how you look at it. Until 7th round, the guy who cast flowers is mana deficient versus the one who did not.
-
Wildhorn is correct. The numbers don't lie and you can't argue with the math. If you cast the mana flowers on round one, then you are forfeiting one round to summon a creature every round thereafter for the next 5 rounds. Meanwhile, if you don't cast the flowers, you can summon those same creatures on rounds 1 and 2, skip round 3, and summon them again on rounds 4, 5, and 6. The result is the same both ways, you have summoned 5 creatures over 6 rounds and have the same amount of mana to spend on other spells. By not casting the flowers however, you have 2 extra quick actions to work with and you build up your threat faster.
So, the statement that the flowers only become better after round 7 is correct. The real question is, can you leverage the advantage of not casting the flowers before you reach round 7? I believe that this is most certainly possible, in which case you are better off not casting the flowers (or crystals as the case may be).
-
In my mind the the interesting comparison is Mana Crystal vs Discount Ring (Ring of Beasts / Force Ring / Enchanter's Ring, etc.). For example, I have had good results playing Forcemaster opening with Force Ring an no additional mana enhancement.
For equipment based Mages, there is a good argument that the Battleforge is well worth the additional 3 mana for tempo advantage.
-
I agree. The Discount Rings are fantastic. That's because they can pay for themselves in half the time it takes for the Mana Crystal to.
Battleforge also could be much more valuable than Mana Crystal in certain builds because of the Action advantage it gives you. This makes up for the Mana Deficit you are entering into when you cast it, which it can't pay off for 8 rounds thereafter.
-
In my mind the the interesting comparison is Mana Crystal vs Discount Ring (Ring of Beasts / Force Ring / Enchanter's Ring, etc.). For example, I have had good results playing Forcemaster opening with Force Ring an no additional mana enhancement.
For equipment based Mages, there is a good argument that the Battleforge is well worth the additional 3 mana for tempo advantage.
If you're going to do that, you may as well compare Spawnpoints also... though it can be difficult being accurate with some of the channeling amounts (extra mana for opponent's spells being cast or due to the presence of Clerics, etc.), and you have to deal with how long you expect these to exist due to armor / life.
-
Spawnpoints are not there for mana saving (they only payback in 5-7 rounds). They are useful by saving you a Full Action, so you are not locked down to summon creature.
-
Spawnpoints are not there for mana saving (they only payback in 5-7 rounds). They are useful by saving you a Full Action, so you are not locked down to summon creature.
Putting spawnpoints into 1 box seems invalid to me now that we see they can do more then "just" spawn creatures.
(creatures, conjurations and equipment so far)
I dont feel locked down when i quickcast something both because i can move first and because it can be done with the quickcast marker.
Also i kinda disagree with spawnpoitns are not mana saving.
Gate of Voltari can give you a very noticeable mana saving while saving you actions.
The thing about gate is, once it repaid itself (14 mana channeled) it usually doesnt provide just 1 mana, but often 2 and sometimes 3 per round.
For 9 mana (8 with ring) the druid can get a 1 channeling vinetree that grants the druid 1 increased channeling.
This is not JUST an action saver - its definately also a mana saver / gainer.
Especially combined with he vine markers that will almost garuantee that she has the time she needs to regain the mana.
Wasnt the whole point with samara tree to get a mana engine going ?
-
No jacksmack.
First, usually people say "Spawnpoint" for the ones that spawn creatures, else we call it Battle Forge directly (and no spawnpoint spawn conjuration yet, the yard only store mana).
Second, you do not save mana with spawnpoint because you paid upfront mana to get it. So with your gate of voltari example, it takes between 14 (unlikely) and 5 rounds to pay itself back. So here again, same deal than mana flower. So yeah, spawnpoints are an action saver, not a mana saver.
For your vine tree example, don't use a ring to compare. You paid mana for that ring.
So 9 mana for the tree. Yes it gives +1 channeling, but guess what? You paid 9 mana for it. Since the tree also generate mana, it produce 2 mana per round. Here again it take 5 rounds to pay back (but sligthly better than mana flower). So here again, it is not a mana saving thing, it is an action saving.
Edit: I feel I need to add before topic switch to that, I do not say Spawnpoints are bad, they are very useful to save actions. But not mana.
-
(and no spawnpoint spawn conjuration yet, the yard only store mana).
Well...the trees spawn conjurations.
Regarding the value of spawnpoints, I absolutely agree that their purpose is to gain action advantage. The extra channeling is bundled into the spawnpoints to help offset the cost of the extra actions, otherwise players would not be gaining actions since they wouldn't have enough mana to feed themselves and their spawnpoints. But mana generators are always better choices if mana is all you want, since they also place no restrictions on what you can do with that mana.
-
I have stated very clearly that this play is a loss of tempo up front and that the math will smooth out if you graph it. At the start of the game you get 10 extra mana, how you spend it early in the game will guide your play style. If you play mana boosters up front with your extra mana, they pay for themselves as discussed. After many games with many different openings, I have found great value in the amount mana I am channeling in each turn. So much so that it isn't a simple (Casting Cost - 1 )/5 for the Crystal or Flower. The value to is provided by the enhanced channeling rate early and mid-game, basically rounds 2-8. I favor playing creatures in the 11-13 mana range. The straight channeling increase provides me the ability to summon a creature each round early game and allows me to use this mana to cast other spells in conjunction along way.
-
I have stated very clearly that this play is a loss of tempo up front and that the math will smooth out if you graph it. At the start of the game you get 10 extra mana, how you spend it early in the game will guide your play style. If you play mana boosters up front with your extra mana, they pay for themselves as discussed. After many games with many different openings, I have found great value in the amount mana I am channeling in each turn. So much so that it isn't a simple (Casting Cost - 1 )/5 for the Crystal or Flower. The value to is provided by the enhanced channeling rate early and mid-game, basically rounds 2-8. I favor playing creatures in the 11-13 mana range. The straight channeling increase provides me the ability to summon a creature each round early game and allows me to use this mana to cast other spells in conjunction along way.
I think what others are disagreeing with is the idea that this channeling is a unique benefit from the mana generators. After all, if you saved the 5 mana that you would have used to cast the flower, you could instead dole that out over the next five turns, which would be equivalent.
Of course, this would obviously be pointless, since then you would be in the same position 5 turns later, but without a flower. So saving the mana-per-turn isn't the point here, saving the quick action and mana during the intervening turns is. When you talk about the additional channeling each round, you are correct insofar as there is no benefit to saving the 5 mana to use one at a time over those 5 rounds as opposed to casting the flower, if you are only using one of those mana per round.
If your strategy calls for investing actions in creatures, one per turn, then since you have a limited number of full actions (one per turn, coincidentally), it makes sense to ensure that you channel enough mana each turn to do that. And if your creatures happen to be in the 11-12 range, and you are not playing with a spawnpoint, then you might as well spend your initial starting mana to create mana generators, since you don't have the actions to do anything else.
But it is not correct to say that the channeling gives a unique benefit during the turns it takes to pay off the mana cost of the generator. Playing the generator might be a no-brainer if you have nothing else to do with the mana and don't need more mana to summon creatures than you can channel, but although it undoubtedly gives you an advantage after it has paid off it does not give you a unique advantage while it is paying off; at best, during that time period, it is no better than simply saving your mana, except in the uncommon case when your opponent uses mana drain a lot early game. And the inflexibility that it gives for those five rounds (in case you need to cast something more expensive) is a downside during that time.
-
Thanks ACG to have said it with a better english than me.
Also I forgot the Vine Tree can cast vine conjuration. So I stand half-corrected (sincenit also spawn creatures ;))
-
The way I see things, is you have certain things you want.have to do early on. If you only channel 9 mana and do not increase channeling once you have spent your bonus start mana, you have two way to plan. Plan for a spell or 2 spells that cost no more than 9 mana or 11 mana (if you cast two flowers). I find that I much prefer the action efficiency of casting Dragonscale Hauberk + Morning Star rather than casting just Hauberk and trying to figure out what to do with 3 mana. Typically there is not much I want to do repeatedly in the 3 mana range. Bump up a couple of points now you are talking. At 9 mana I am always mana starved through out the entire game.
-
Using all your mana every turn is a very bad way to play. It makes you mana starved and predictable. Opponent know you can't cast a spell that is over your channeling. That is why I prefer to do some big casting in first few turns then cast low mana cost spells to get in the 15-20 mana range at beginning of my turn. Always have 1 spell you want to cast and 1 spell to counter the thing you fear most your opponent would cast that turn. That way you build up a mana pool, allowing you to drop the bomb at the right time.
-
Let's look at it this way: Say you want to do nothing but cast Kreigsbiels as Warlord all game. They cost 11 mana.
WITHOUT MANA FLOWERS
Turn 1 - 19 mana. Down to 8 after casting.
Turn 2 - 17 mana. Down to 6 after casting.
Turn 3 - 15 mana. Down to 4 after casting.
Turn 4 - 13 mana. Down to 2 after casting.
Turn 5 - 11 mana. Down to 0 after casting.
Turn 6 - 9 mana, can't cast any more kreigs
WITH MANA FLOWERS
Turn 1 - 19 mana. Down to 9 after double flower.
Turn 2 - 20 mana. Down to 9 after casting.
Turn 3 - 20 mana. Down to 9 after casting.
and so on.
Without the flowers, you can't make more kreigs after turn 5 (yes I know there's a limit on level 2+ creatures, ignore it for now). However with the flowers you can make them indefinitely. So the flowers pay off on round 6 as expected.
But let's try it with the more expensive Bridge Trolls instead.
WITHOUT MANA FLOWERS
Turn 1 - 19 mana. Down to 6 after casting.
Turn 2 - 15 mana. Down to 2 after casting.
Turn 3 - 11 mana. can't cast any more trolls
WITH MANA FLOWERS
Turn 1 - 19 mana. Down to 9 after double flower.
Turn 2 - 20 mana. Down to 7 after casting.
Turn 3 - 18 mana. Down to 5 after casting.
Turn 4 - 16 mana. Down to 3 after casting.
Turn 5 - 14 mana. Down to 1 after casting.
Turn 6 - 12 mana. can't cast any more trolls
From this example we can see that on Turn 3, both builds have 2 trolls out. However on turn 4, the build with the mana flowers is actually ahead on total Troll numbers before the mana from the flowers mathematically evens out. What do we make of that?
-
Redo your Troll example but keep going with no flower...
You will see 3 troll for both on turn 4 and 4 for both on turn 5 .
But no Flower had an extra Troll for 2 Turns
-
From this example we can see that on Turn 3, both builds have 2 trolls out. However on turn 4, the build with the mana flowers is actually ahead on total Troll numbers before the mana from the flowers mathematically evens out. What do we make of that?
We make out that you didn't chart past round 3 without mana flowers, not that it doesn't match up.
Round 4: 7 mana after casting
Round 5: 3 mana after casting
Round 6: Can't cast.
Thus, by round 6 they both have 4 Trolls out and the Mana Flower does not come out ahead until Round 7.
-
I think using mana generators is a valid strategy, but it is also fine to not use them. This is one part of the game that is actually fairly clear cut and simple. Before Round 7, not casting the mana generators clearly gives you an advantage over casting them. However, after Round 7, the mana generators come out with the advantage. The question is, which advantage are you better able to leverage into a win?
People who play for a quick aggro game shouldn't waste the time and resources on mana generators. They want to have a clear lead by the time round 7 comes around, and I believe that it is possible for them to do this. However, if you don't expect to have the game decided early on, then the mana generators are probably better.
I think the danger really lies in the extremes. If you are rushing your opponent without setting up an engine, then you are risking running low on steam when his kicks into gear. However, if you are building a big engine, then you are leaving yourself at risk to a rush. I tend to pack some kind of infrastructure in my books, be it mana crystals or spawnpoints, but I typically don't cast more than one during the game. You don't want to paint yourself into a corner, but rather leave yourself room to respond to your opponent.
-
Eh, I tried.
-
I really haven't seen any quick games any more since the nerfs of BF and ToL. Most of my games are in the 10-12 rounds range. I have found the most success being able to consistently cast spells in a round with my channeling in the 10-11 range. Payoff is almost never in the front of my mind, when I am planning out the opening for a new book, I like to have 4-5 rounds (roughly) mapped out with an A and B scenario. I have found that if I have spent most of my 28 mana (Channeling 9) in the first two rounds (non channeling boost plays), that my games typically end in defeat for my mage. On the other hand 10/11 Channeling with a equal opponent will typically be a winner for me.
This line of thought applies more to the 9 Channeling mages much more so than the 10 Channeling mages.
-
4-5 round to setup? In my meta by 5th round one of the 2 mages usually is at half hp. We are very agressive.
-
4-5 round to setup? In my meta by 5th round one of the 2 mages usually is at half hp. We are very agressive.
I have found that the Guardian Angels from CoK really put a damper down on Agro decks. No wonder you don't like Mana Flowers, they are a waste in that situation. A bit off topic - Do you play on OCTGN? Some people only like IRL and that I understand too.
-
I do not play on OCTGN but only because I dont have a PC.
-
Mana Crystals/Flowers are perfectly fine, but you're not supposed to splurge 15 mana and 3 actions on them in most games. 1-2 mana making cards is all you really need at most, and since it's only 2 actions, you won't get so behind (in actions) since that play only takes 1 round.
As others have said, rings are the best. A solid opener for pretty much any mage is his/her class ring + move + mana crystal/flower, or 2x mana crystals + move, and then Turn 2 is class ring + creature or whatever. Basically, you don't have any real risk of being attacked on turn 1, so there's no reason not to improve your channeling.
Round 2 you could be attacked, but that's not really wise on your opponent's part because that gives up developing their board with creatures/conjurations. The fastest openings possible aren't actually viable if the other player is running armor and some way to heal...which they should.
-
Using all your mana every turn is a very bad way to play. It makes you mana starved and predictable. Opponent know you can't cast a spell that is over your channeling. That is why I prefer to do some big casting in first few turns then cast low mana cost spells to get in the 15-20 mana range at beginning of my turn. Always have 1 spell you want to cast and 1 spell to counter the thing you fear most your opponent would cast that turn. That way you build up a mana pool, allowing you to drop the bomb at the right time.
I rarely use all of my mana for a given round, but I do often spend most of it. 2-4 left over unless I'm going melee with my mage.
-
Can you have 6 dwarf kiesg in your deck so only 12 creatures would be cast
-
Using all your mana every turn is a very bad way to play. It makes you mana starved and predictable. Opponent know you can't cast a spell that is over your channeling. That is why I prefer to do some big casting in first few turns then cast low mana cost spells to get in the 15-20 mana range at beginning of my turn. Always have 1 spell you want to cast and 1 spell to counter the thing you fear most your opponent would cast that turn. That way you build up a mana pool, allowing you to drop the bomb at the right time.
I rarely use all of my mana for a given round, but I do often spend most of it. 2-4 left over unless I'm going melee with my mage.
There's nothing wrong with spending all your mana, as long as your opponent is doing the same. If you don't spend enough mana, you risk getting behind in board position and actions. I.e., if your opponent plays a large creature, you need to play one of similar strength that ideally counters their creature, or some cost-efficient removal that takes it out of the fight for a while (sleep, turn to stone, etc). It's more about reacting properly to the current situation than trying to hoard your mana.
Generally, I don't usually want to be the first player to make a big play because it leaves you open to getting countered in the next round, but depending on how your dice rolls go and the creatures you have left, sometimes you just have to bite the bullet and make the play so you dont get too far behind.
-
If you spend all your mana, you are just telling me: "You can go FFA on me, I can't reveal any Nullify, Block, Reverse Attack, etc.".
-
Rings are great, but they are specific, a Flowers mana can be used for any spell you have in the spellbook.
IMO, mirroring the opponents mana utilization is allowing him to dictate the game, if he is a Warlock saving for Adramelech, I am supposed to hold on to my mana until then not utilizing my actions? I perceive that there is nothing wrong in spending all of your mana, each round if you want. Now there is a grain of salt in there, if you are casting out mandatory Enchantments you need to reveal costs on hand etc. In game there are very few things that have 0 mana or 5 having mana on hand that will make a big difference (other than the previously mentioned hidden Enchantments).
The point is about increasing your channeling to enable an action efficiency on spells cost a bit more than your typical channeling rate over the game. Mage Actions are your most valuable commodity in the game, having to skip a round to save enough to bring out a [mwcard=FWC01]Dwarf Kriegsbiel[/mwcard] once is ok but you get to the point very quickly where you are wasting an action to save the mana needed. I guess you could equip a Meditation Amulet for those cases but then that is yet another action needed to get this out (in a mom-BF build).
-
IMO, mirroring the opponents mana utilization is allowing him to dictate the game, if he is a Warlock saving for Adramelech, I am supposed to hold on to my mana until then not utilizing my actions? I perceive that there is nothing wrong in spending all of your mana, each round if you want. Now there is a grain of salt in there, if you are casting out mandatory Enchantments you need to reveal costs on hand etc. In game there are very few things that have 0 mana or 5 having mana on hand that will make a big difference (other than the previously mentioned hidden Enchantments).
What I meant wasn't that you mirror you opponent; just try to recognize the situation and anticipate what's going to happen based on what mage you're against, and then try to play a card that will deal with that situation as best you can. I.e., If you're a Druid vs a Warlock and you suspect an Adramelech play (not hard to guess if the Warlock is saving up mana for a few rounds), you should have something other than your typical plant card ready to deal with that (probably Tarok w/buffs or Samandriel if you really need a good counter).
And you don't stop playing cards altogether if you see your opponent being frugal with mana and you don't know what they're up to; you just play cards (usually creatures) that are "generically good" that are just meant to be all-around solid ways to increase your board presence and dice count rather than counter specific kinds of creatures. Creatures without special abilities but have good stats and low cost are pretty much meant for that exact purpose, such as Orc Butchers, Skeletal Sentries/Minions, Timber Wolves/Falcons/Foxes, etc.
I suspect that's the reason why Steelclaws have become popular, since they're pretty much the biggest creature you can play that is "generically good," especially with Wizards, who mainly have creatures that are more specialized rather than all-around-ers.
-
If you spend all your mana, you are just telling me: "You can go FFA on me, I can't reveal any Nullify, Block, Reverse Attack, etc.".
If you like to play fast with mana, it's a good idea to toss out a Decoy or two during the course of the game for just this reason... to pay those reveal costs when your opponent thinks you can't.
-
Spending an action to play a decoy doesn't seem like a good idea. Outside of that legendary fairy, I don't see much of a point in actually using them other than to break suspected nullifies...and you can do that with any enchantment with little risk as long as you have more than 1 copy.
Idk, I've never found myself using Decoy. There's plenty of other cards that actually do things, like the super-cheap commands or just basic melee.
-
Spending an action to play a decoy doesn't seem like a good idea. Outside of that legendary fairy, I don't see much of a point in actually using them other than to break suspected nullifies...and you can do that with any enchantment with little risk as long as you have more than 1 copy.
Idk, I've never found myself using Decoy. There's plenty of other cards that actually do things, like the super-cheap commands or just basic melee.
@reddawn,
I think the point was to bank a couple of Decoys and then leave yourself with zero mana. The opponent then sees that you have no mana and makes a move based off of that assumption. You then reveal the Decoys, charge you mana battery up X amount and use that newly available mana to pay for that hidden enchantment.
-
Wow, that's like a double decoy! :)
If you spend all your mana, you are just telling me: "You can go FFA on me, I can't reveal any Nullify, Block, Reverse Attack, etc.".
If you like to play fast with mana, it's a good idea to toss out a Decoy or two during the course of the game for just this reason... to pay those reveal costs when your opponent thinks you can't.
-
If you cast them just to reveal them later as "banked" mana, you can use Enchanter's Ring and cast them on friendly targets. Then when revealing them you're actually gaining more than you spent to cast the decoys (assuming you use enough enchantments for Enchanters Ring to pay for its own cost, which is typically the case.)