This is actually the thing that annoys me. From a cost benefit analysis this is a very cheap cost that they can do. It's not more content, story lore, or online gameplay; it is someone at each tournament walking around taking notes and essentially writing a story or blog about it.

And like most tcg tournaments they should have a list if all the cards in the books, they should publish the top 4, 8, or 16.

And I'm not trying to be mean, but as a consumer this is very disappointing because they already have people at this convention, and are even running it.

But then again it was yesterday, and it does take time. However, if AW or MW under performs in reporting tournament data then to me that shows a lack of commitment and thoughtfulness.

So, let's see what we get. Tournament play is going to be the difference between this game being a mtg like phenomenon versus a fad. The learning curve of this game entices a certain kind of gamer, and it's not really casual gamer.  It's the people that want tournament play.

Against the FM I would suggest:

Move forward and cast imp behind me, and then curses ring.  And then full cast a slayer and QC a trap like the new spiked trap. or a defensive gear item. or harmonize the imp.

By turn three I Would expect the FM to be on me and it would be time for a chest item QC, have a curse on the imp, and have an unavoidable attack ready or summon a gorgon archer in an adjacent zone.

The trick being what to use to consume the defense, but with 2 strong melee and two range would make the FM play by taking into account the warlocks creatures.

I do see the ambassador program as a good step in conjunction with that person being able to find a location and time that is great. IMO what would be good to mimic is a program like MTG's "Friday night magic," and a way to track wins for league play like in mtg and Yugioh.

As for other games, this is a niche game for ppl that wanted MTG/Yugioh/Pokemon but with tactical movement and less random draw factor. And the only barrier is the learning curve that it takes, which will then fix the problems with length of games.

So I have only played a few dozen games but I am one of the stronger players in my play group. ( I'm just qualifying that I'm a solid player but not necessarily a "Master".)

So the Harry Potter mechanic - is Wand Wars.    It appears that if one player can blow up the other player's wand while not getting his own blown up, that gives that player a nearly overwhelming advantage.   (Rarely when I play, if I'm able to be the player who's wands live, do I lose the game.)

This I believe is caused by a number of factors - Direct damage spells can be super potent, that and the ability to put teleport on a wand, can keep your Mage out of danger while he plinks away at creature and/or temples.  Not to mention putting Resurrection on a wand means you never lose the battle of "Ran out of Creatures in Spell Book".    It's hard to build an effective spell book based on Direct damage, because you run out of spells too fast unless you bind your direct damage to a wand.    Too many creatures to deal with and opposing mage to deal with.   You'd have to commit a huge portion of your spell book to direct damage, and that would leave you woefully short on Creatures and other utility spells you'd need to deal with problems that come up.

Someone who builds a deck based on creatures could probably get away without a wand....but the clock is ticking, the longer the game goes, the higher the risk of running out of creatures, where as this is not an issue for the Wanded caster.

The game can get really ugly really fast if something gets cast that you can't deal with like a nasty Curse put on you when you're out of disenchants.  So it's pretty important to stock up on those....but you only get 6.  Where as a mage who's wand hasn't blown up, by only having one disenchant in your spell book can cast it an unlimited number of times if he can keep his wand safe.

So the just of what I'm getting at is:  It seems to me that wands are just way too important in the game.   The game is often won or lost by blowing up your opponent's wand while keeping your own safe.  That seems to be the single most important factor in determining the outcome of the game.   I'm likening it to a Harry Potter wizard battle, whomever successfully casts "Dispelliamus" and disarms the opposing wizard wins.   (Of course that analogy is a bit exaggerated.  It is still possible to win without wands, but I have to say that the advantage is hugely in the favor of the mage who wins the wand battle.

Things to solve the problem:
Cantrips to me seem to be the biggest possible solution to the wand issue.   The biggest problem is when a mage can no longer deal with something;   He runs out of creatures to throw into the frey, or gets cursed and runs out of disenchants or gets hit with effects, and can't get rid of them (Like Weakness).   If there were utility cantrips out there that did everything you need to do, like disenchant, or get rid of conditions, or resurrection(Or animate dead...for evil folk) and the spell were a cantrip....but one that was harder or more expensive to cast than the non-cantrip version....at least every mage could still fall back on a cantrip to deal with something.

Another option is make Wands indestructible (By rule).   Then the wand battle goes away.   Just make a rule that "Spellbound" objects can't be destroyed.

Or maybe just release some "Indestructible Wands".

If the wands can't be blown up, then the focus of the game will turn away from trying to blow up each other's wands.   

I don't know that that's the best solution, but something. (I believe is needed),  to take the focus away from the early game "Wand battle" that can be so critical to the outcome of the game.

You make a lot of assumptions that are incorrect, and most likely because your play group isn't large or you don't get a challenge.

No one will go into a game without being ready to trash the Opponents wands, and honestly when everyone takes into account the wands then it is no longer an issue, and will likely rotate out of spell books because they are a Kill on sight item. So then what's wrong with them?

And before Harry potter, wands existed and have been about of fantasy genre, so it is honestly a thing that has always been in the game.

Secondly, the spell bound to the wand has to be paid for, so aside from not having to have more than one, there is no great advantage unless you cast it more times than copies of that spell in your book. Also it's a risk because if you cast the wand and it is dissolved you lose mana and take a hit in whatever strategy you want to develop.

Maxing out the new +pay mana spells would also be decent to load up with in a mana control build.
And including a lot of spells that can lead to rot conditions.
And more than one equipment that gives defense, so that any attack spells used would be wasted.
And you would also want to go after anything that boosts the opponent's mana gen.
But I think this style of play would also need to be played aggresively early on, so as to keep tempo.

arcane spells give the most versatility (whats what i meant by flexibility). But when it comes to actually killing the other other mage there is only the arcane creatures, and compared to other schools average at best.

i would say the Angles and Lord of Fire are worth while cards to play in most games, the invisible stalker possibly as well. the wizard will only get stronger when more elemental based creatures are released, imagine his choice of Earth ele, Water ele, Air ele or Fire ele and then the equivalent lvl 3 creature in that school.

Actually those jumbo creatures suck without support bc if they die you blew a lot of mana. They are better when included for a particular strategy.

But for arcane and the wizard the gorgon archer and hydra are amazing, but they are expensive for non-arcane mages.

When a creature dies, then it can have a ghoul or skeleton that auto rezs/summons when it dies.  Or give them a dismiss/canabalize your own creatures for a power up.

I think if we like this game it is important to work with AW and not against them at all.  They are a very young company. SO how about everyone cools off with the complain ought to do this thread.

IF you love the game then you love the game. Any change you want to make is likely BS because if it was a deal breaker you wouldn't be on here unless you just hated the game.

So. . . just talk it up, and create word of mouth.  Then go play the game, and teach people how to play. Get people excited about the whole game, and help them love it.

I didnt like the game until I saw a critical review of the game play, and I almost shit myself in love. 

Our goal should be to go out and recruit at least three people that actually buy the game. And encourage them to recruit one or two people.  Or buy at least one person it for Christmas.