Show Posts
16
General Discussion / Re: Rush/Fast books are dead and will never recover unless cards are Errataed/Banned
« on: August 28, 2019, 03:08:09 PM »
First of all I want to address the obvious flaw in your reasoning:
The problem with that statement is that you are in the top 90 percentile of "experienced mw players" / competitive players. So you probably beat 9 out of 10 players who challenge you regardless of the deck you use. So if you beat someone it's not necessarily because your "triple-spawnpoint+ritual"-deck is stronger, but because you just played better, sry ~ :p
---
That aside, it would be hypocritically of me not to admit that my own 2 strongest books are both using the Ritual and are both spawnpoint-builds.
And that nicely leads to the point I want to make:
How do you define a fast/rush book?
1. First thing that comes to mind is probably this answer: By the amount of spawnpoint the book uses.
Example: If you are playing without a single spawnpoint you are by definition a rush/fast-book.
2. Another approach might be the question "in which turn does this book want to engage the enemy under regular circumstances?"
Example: If your strategy is to hit the enemy mage at least in turn .. 5? Then it's a rush book.
3. We neither ask how many spawnpoints a book has nor do we let an arbitrary number of turns decide if one book is a rush book or not, but we judge by the question: "What is the strategy of the mage?"
Example: If the book is tailored to attacking only the mage, never other creatures, conjurations or spawnpoints, then it's a rush/fast book.
Honestly, all of those ideas have merit. As long as we haven't even established what exactly a fast/rush book is, it's kind of strange to discuss how effective those books are. Because everyone is talking about a different book in their mind.
Taking up my earlier comment about how my two strongest books are ritual and spawnpoint books, I would also categorize them as aggressive, maybe even early aggression-books. But I would not say that they are rush-builds.
Maybe a good way to figure out how aggressive a book is to ask how fast they get to their dmg-peak or near it?
Quote
if you disagree with this feel free to try any fast book of yours and attempt to beat my triple spawnpoint necromancer, my gate wizard....and for the sake of it... i could make a Priestess abusing the above mentioned cards as well.
The problem with that statement is that you are in the top 90 percentile of "experienced mw players" / competitive players. So you probably beat 9 out of 10 players who challenge you regardless of the deck you use. So if you beat someone it's not necessarily because your "triple-spawnpoint+ritual"-deck is stronger, but because you just played better, sry ~ :p
---
That aside, it would be hypocritically of me not to admit that my own 2 strongest books are both using the Ritual and are both spawnpoint-builds.
And that nicely leads to the point I want to make:
How do you define a fast/rush book?
1. First thing that comes to mind is probably this answer: By the amount of spawnpoint the book uses.
Example: If you are playing without a single spawnpoint you are by definition a rush/fast-book.
2. Another approach might be the question "in which turn does this book want to engage the enemy under regular circumstances?"
Example: If your strategy is to hit the enemy mage at least in turn .. 5? Then it's a rush book.
3. We neither ask how many spawnpoints a book has nor do we let an arbitrary number of turns decide if one book is a rush book or not, but we judge by the question: "What is the strategy of the mage?"
Example: If the book is tailored to attacking only the mage, never other creatures, conjurations or spawnpoints, then it's a rush/fast book.
Honestly, all of those ideas have merit. As long as we haven't even established what exactly a fast/rush book is, it's kind of strange to discuss how effective those books are. Because everyone is talking about a different book in their mind.
Taking up my earlier comment about how my two strongest books are ritual and spawnpoint books, I would also categorize them as aggressive, maybe even early aggression-books. But I would not say that they are rush-builds.
Maybe a good way to figure out how aggressive a book is to ask how fast they get to their dmg-peak or near it?
