1
League / Tournament Play / Re: UK Players
« on: May 23, 2013, 12:50:30 PM »
Great to aee another Nottingham player, but I am at the Games Expo this weekend 
May 17, 2024, 06:28:37 PM
Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Pages: [1] 2
2
League / Tournament Play / Re: UK Games Expo
« on: May 14, 2013, 05:55:30 AM »
On the Friday the War Machine tables will be free so I will set myself up there with a board. Keep your eye out for the fat bearded bespectacled gamer!
3
League / Tournament Play / Re: UK Games Expo
« on: April 23, 2013, 03:34:35 PM »
Well that is at least five of us! Will be good to play new people 
4
League / Tournament Play / UK Games Expo
« on: April 23, 2013, 03:18:56 PM »
Am wondering if we can get a few of us together on the Friday to play? I will be doing Warmachine on the Saturday and Sunday which is why I would suggest the Friday. If we get enough interest am also happy to consider running a tournament.
In addition if anyone wants to try or learn the game there let me know.
In addition if anyone wants to try or learn the game there let me know.
5
Alternative Play / Re: Starting with all equipment
« on: April 21, 2013, 07:21:33 PM »
It would change the game quite dramatically
Small creature attacks become almost irrelevant, and your effect rolls become more important.
It makes defensive strategies stronger as you know you can survive far more attacks in the early stages.
It gives an extra benefit to fire mages due to the ease of item destruction with explode, and you could then also take dissolves to end with a large equipment amount 'up' on your opponent. If anything it reduces Steal Equipment as you will have the slot filled yourlf.
Small creature attacks become almost irrelevant, and your effect rolls become more important.
It makes defensive strategies stronger as you know you can survive far more attacks in the early stages.
It gives an extra benefit to fire mages due to the ease of item destruction with explode, and you could then also take dissolves to end with a large equipment amount 'up' on your opponent. If anything it reduces Steal Equipment as you will have the slot filled yourlf.
6
League / Tournament Play / Re: Organized Play
« on: April 04, 2013, 09:49:56 AM »
As we seem to have enough interest now I am interested in running an event in the UK. Is it possible to get a pack shipped over?
7
League / Tournament Play / Re: UK Players
« on: April 04, 2013, 08:08:55 AM »
So if I was to organise a tournament up in Nottingham or Mansfield how much interest would there be?
8
General Discussion / Re: List Your Favorite Mages
« on: April 04, 2013, 07:59:31 AM »
1 Warlock
Versatile, probably the most aggressive caster. And has a whip.
2 Wizard
Too flexible to ignore, can handlg any play style and can adjust to the enemy strategy.
3 Priestess
I love playing healers, only reason she is not in first is she can drag games out which makes it less fun for both players.
4 Force Mistress
Interesting but a bit too one dimensional at the moment.
5 Warlord
Least played with, just strikes me as a bit boring and does not appear to do anything particularly special.
6 Beastmaster
Weakest caster in my opinion, the swarm should not work if you have built a deck that can deal with it and any pther strategy other casters can do better.
Versatile, probably the most aggressive caster. And has a whip.
2 Wizard
Too flexible to ignore, can handlg any play style and can adjust to the enemy strategy.
3 Priestess
I love playing healers, only reason she is not in first is she can drag games out which makes it less fun for both players.
4 Force Mistress
Interesting but a bit too one dimensional at the moment.
5 Warlord
Least played with, just strikes me as a bit boring and does not appear to do anything particularly special.
6 Beastmaster
Weakest caster in my opinion, the swarm should not work if you have built a deck that can deal with it and any pther strategy other casters can do better.
9
General Discussion / Re: How do you play forcemaster?
« on: April 03, 2013, 05:57:22 PM »
Any deck should not be built with just one way to play and the pre built deck supports that as well as customised decks.
My last game involved me casting the force blade, a dancing blade, moving as fast as possible, and then pinning them with the pinning and damaging upkeep spell.
My last game involved me casting the force blade, a dancing blade, moving as fast as possible, and then pinning them with the pinning and damaging upkeep spell.
10
Rules Discussion / Re: Action Markers a Limit?
« on: March 22, 2013, 06:31:22 AM »
I prefer playing with low monster counts. This variant would suck for me
11
Rules Discussion / Re: Alright... weird enchantment question.
« on: March 22, 2013, 05:19:38 AM »
But if someone is going to cheat it is a rules problem anyway. There is nothing stopping me casting two nullify enchantments now and only revealing one other than honesty.
12
Rules Discussion / Re: Alright... weird enchantment question.
« on: March 19, 2013, 01:54:18 PM »
Whilst I agree with Shadow that it would be the simplest I think they should be removed. If not it then makes valid the tactic of if (for some reason) you want the same enchantment as your opponent has cast on your creature then you could cast it and keep it hidden until removing the other one.
13
Rules Discussion / Re: Alright... weird enchantment question.
« on: March 19, 2013, 08:31:46 AM »
Tirian you are wrong.
The rules for this comes down to one part. It states that If an identical enchantment is revealed on the same target, it is immediately destroyed.
Only one of the two enchantments can be revealed and so only one of the two enchantments can trigger this condition to be destroyed, and that would be the unrevealed enchantment.
As the player controlling the hidden enchantment at this point you would have to declare what it is and that it is destroyed.
The rules for this comes down to one part. It states that If an identical enchantment is revealed on the same target, it is immediately destroyed.
Only one of the two enchantments can be revealed and so only one of the two enchantments can trigger this condition to be destroyed, and that would be the unrevealed enchantment.
As the player controlling the hidden enchantment at this point you would have to declare what it is and that it is destroyed.
14
Rules Discussion / Re: Alright... weird enchantment question.
« on: March 18, 2013, 02:35:26 PM »
But there is a core concept that is wrong in the first question. You cannot defend against an enchantment by keeping one unrevealed on yourself as the opponent can cast and reveal before you could ever reveal your enchantment and therefore the one you cast but did not reveal gets destroyed. Revealed is a state for an enchantment so for the multiple rule to trigger that state must apply to one of the enchantments which then dictates what happens.
In the event that two player have both cast an enchantment on an object or zone and not revealed it then the rules cover it. When one player elects to reveal the other players enchantment gets destroyed.
If someone casts two enchantments on the same object then you have to deal with it as you would any position where something gets played wrong.
In the event that two player have both cast an enchantment on an object or zone and not revealed it then the rules cover it. When one player elects to reveal the other players enchantment gets destroyed.
If someone casts two enchantments on the same object then you have to deal with it as you would any position where something gets played wrong.
15
League / Tournament Play / Re: UK Players
« on: March 18, 2013, 11:21:48 AM »
Potentially two players but we both play minis tournaments so not always available. Hopefully will be at the Games Expo but may be playing Warmachine the whole weekend.
Pages: [1] 2
