Arcane Wonders Forum
Mage Wars => Strategy and Tactics => Topic started by: Charmyna on September 11, 2013, 07:06:07 AM
-
First, I know its not all about spell points. But, I will show that its really important to take them into consideration when making strategic/tactical decisions.
Let me start with a statement: A well played wizard cant be defeated in early or mid game. Voltaric shield together with some armor and cheap teleport/mage wand allows the wizard to escape every rush. Therefore, if you play a wizard yourself or if you play against a wizard, you need to be prepared for late game!
Btw, late game is a complex word. What exactly is late game? I would say it’s the part in the game when you feel like your options or your opponents options during planning phase shrink. Lets say, you or your opponent is about to run out of cards from a category that is really important for his strategy (with category I mean: creatures/enchantments/incantations/attack spells/conjurations/equipment).
So the question is: What matters the most during late game? Here are a few possible answers:
Having higher channeling.
This does matter for sure. But, if you run out of cards (i.e. options), especially if you run out of creatures, your mana wont help you at all.
Board control.
Sure, it helps having more and stronger creatures than your opponent or lowering his channeling enough so that he can cast a costly spell every other round only. But again, if you run out of good cards while your opponent still has some nice options to choose from, you wont keep board control for much longer!
In my experience from over 300 games I think what matters the most are spell points. Let me give you a few examples to demonstrate what I mean. They will be somehow simplified but still they illustrate the point and things like this happen quite often in some variation:
Example 1: In school vs out of school creatures.
In your build (wizard) you focus on in school creatures. Lets say you have 4 hydras. Your opponent is a wizard too and focuses on out of school creatures. He has a grizzly and a grimson sniper. Both of you invested the same spell points, but you can bet, at some point during late game his two creatures will be gone while you still have 2 of your 4 hydras on the board. GG!
Well, someone might argue that the sniper and grizzly put you under enough pressure to pay for their spell points and will kill your wizard quicker than you can make use of your bigger creature pool. I don’t think so. Even with a sniper and/or grizzly its really hard to kill a wizard that has some armor+voltaric shield +regrowth on him and is supported by hydras/gremlins/gargoyles. In the end, the sniper/grizzly will die at some point without putting your wizard under enough pressure to finish him off. I had enough of those games.
What does this have to do with the topic of this thread? Its all about spell points! The grizzly/sniper costs twice as much spell points compared to the hydra. Therefore loosing the grizzly/sniper will hurt much more than loosing a hydra and at some point the out of school wizard will have no creature left while the in school wizard still has some.
Example 2: Equipment vs Dissolve.
Your opponent likes having more life. Therefore, he includes two sunfire amulets (which give +1 life each round) in his spell book for 8 spell points. You are a water wizard with 6 dissolves. During the game he will cast the amulet twice and you dissolve it soon. He will still get 2 or more life from it, but in the end he will have paid 8 spell points while you paid 2 (with mage wand even less). I cant stress enough how important this is! Two life, heck even six life, really don’t matter if your opponent spent six spell points more than you did! Late game is not decided by six more life (and, as I said, as a well played wizard or if playing against a formidable wizard you will reach late game for sure). Its decided by who has the better options to choose from.
Example 3: Essence Drain vs Dispel.
Your opponent casts essence drain four times during the game. You dispel all of them and some of those dispels come from a mage wand. You will have lost 8 or more mana, but your opponent will have spent 4-8 more spell points than you did. This is really in your favor! A reason I do not include essence drain at all in my wizard spell books. Another reason is that I prefer to just kill his creatures quickly. Therefore, an essence drain won’t pay off. A similar example is ghoul rot vs dispel. Although I have to say that ghoul rot is a much bigger threat than essence drain since direct damage hurts a lot more than lost mana.
Example 4: Mind Control vs Dispel.
Your opponent casts mind control four times on your hydra and you dispel it asap. Your hydra will be stunned a lot but in the end the Forcemaster will have paid 20 more spell points than you did. You will win late game!
But be aware: If the Forcemaster uses mind control+obelisk to kill your big creature, this can be a real problem. It costs you spell points as well and might put you under a mana disadvantage which hurts so much that in this case it’s the mana that matters, not the spell points. Therefore, against a FM a mage wand with dispel is quite useful. Mind control has to be revealed between action phases. The latest point he can reveal it is before the final QC phase. If you have enough mana, a dispel wand and no jinx on you, you can dispel the mind control before he can use it to kill your creature during next upkeep phase. You need to save quite a lot mana to do this and need a nullify on yourself to protect against jinx, but it can really be important to let your creatures survive this threat.
Example 5: Attack spells vs creatures.
Your opponent is a wizard that relies on attack spells instead of creatures. He cant focus you while you have a couple creatures out since killing a wizard with attack spells takes really long (if it ever works at all) and during that time your creatures will kill his wizard. Therefore, he needs to take care of your creatures first. But, on average he has to spent more mana than you did and even more importantly, he usually has to spent more spell points (if you dissolve his elemental wand and destroy wizard tower quickly). At some point during the game he will run out of attack spells while you have creatures left.
Something that is closely related to this topic is the question whether to have two distinct strategies or to focus on one strategy. For example, as a warlock having two strategies could be going the curse route while including some melee orientated enchantments/equipments. On the other side you could forget about melee and just put more curses into your spell book.
At first glance it might sound strange, but I believe its often better to focus on one strategy instead of having multiple. The reason is that if you go the curse route half-heartedly you wont reach the point at which your opponent runs out of dispels/purifies. Sure, you will be able to melee, but your opponent will be able to counter that without the need of dispels/purify (i.e. armor+guards).
Another example: You play an earth wizard. Is it better to have a turn to stone and a tanglevine or two turn to stone? Lets neglect that the latter costs more spell points for the moment. Often its better to have two turn to stone! The reason is that turn to stone and tanglevine have different counters (dispel and teleport). Therefore, if you have both spells, its likely that your opponent has enough cards to counter both. But, if you focus on one strategy (i.e. only turn to stone), it is more likely that you reach the point at which your opponent runs out of counters.
Let me summon up: If you think that your games will often reach late game, you really need to consider spell point cost when thinking about your strategy. Be aware that equipment with high spell point costs (e.g. sunfire amulet) will put you under a spell point disadvantage (especially if facing a water wizard which I am sure will become quite popular with Druid vs Necro). If your mage is not a wizard, mage wand will cost a lot too. Still, unlike sunfire amulet, I would advice to take one or even more mage wands into your spell book. They are just too good at conserving spell points.
Maybe even more important than high spell point cost equipments are big out of school creatures. If you have two or more of those creatures, you really don’t want to reach late game! Therefore, if playing a wizard, I think it’s best to take as few out of school creatures as possible since it’s the late game the wizard shines at!
For all other mages this discussion still is important. If you often play non wizard vs non wizard, it matters to think about spell points too. Your games might be quicker as compared to playing against a wizard, but still its not too unlikely that one of you will run out of good options at some point. If you don’t want to be that player, during spell book creation make sure to check whether that out of school card really is worth the extra spell point cost. Maybe you can substitute it with an in school card for nearly the same benefit or maybe digging deeper into an in school based strategy is better compared to having a backup out of school strategy.
-
I absolutely LOVE reading all your write ups Charmyna. Helps us newbies learn a lot. Wizard is without a doubt my favorite Mage (so much versatility and different ways you can play it, so they don't get stale).
Charm where do you spread your points, what is your spell book balance?
60% creatures 20% spells 20% equip/other ??? 40% 40% 20%??? Other?
When you are deciding between a 3 point nuke or a 3 point creature which wins out for you? etc
Increasing Power vs Increasing Versatility
I think the spell point system is what makes this game deep and engaging.
Do you go really heavily in your school and splash a couple needed utility cards from the others?
Do you go purely into your school so you maximize spell points?
Do you spread your points for all your favorite cards from all schools and limit spell points?
Do you go creature heavy, attack spell, incantation etc.
---I'm guessing (correct me if I'm wrong here please but 'longer term' end game you are better off adding a couple extra creatures than a couple extra spells?)
That is the hardest part I have is deciding between some creatures and some nukes. I generally favor things that last a long time or at least multiple rounds. Which is why I use more creatures than I do spells (although I of course put some spells in, but only a handful). Mage wands as you said are great for that, although not having the mage wand dispelled has been an ongoing dilema of mine. I usually just save them for later game when resources of the other mage are getting depleted or they have more to worry about than my wand like a Vampire in their face.
-
I absolutely LOVE reading all your write ups Charmyna. Helps us newbies learn a lot.
Happy to hear that :).
Charm where do you spread your points, what is your spell book balance?
60% creatures 20% spells 20% equip/other ??? 40% 40% 20%??? Other?
When you are deciding between a 3 point nuke or a 3 point creature which wins out for you? etc
My most played wizard spell book has (spell points in brackets):
Creatures (24)
incantations (31) - many dispels, dissolves, teleport
attack spells (8 ) - only one high damage spell, the others are for utility (surging wave, jet stream, geyser)
enchantments (17)
Conjurations (18)
equipment (22)
I am really no fan of attack spells! Without wizard tower I would include even less. I want spells that last on the board in oder to conserve spell points. Btw i dont really have a fixed distribution between creatures, incantations etc in mind when constructing a spell book. I just try to anticipate which spells are needed in the majority of games (or to be more accurate: In the games that are really hard to win). But, more important than anticipation is experience in real games - I adjust the book (one or two cards) very often after playing against a good opponent.
Do you go really heavily in your school and splash a couple needed utility cards from the others?
Do you go purely into your school so you maximize spell points?
Do you spread your points for all your favorite cards from all schools and limit spell points?
Do you go creature heavy, attack spell, incantation etc.
I try to stay in school as much as possible. But, there are spells from other schools I dont want to miss (e.g. regrowth, regrowth belt, rhino hide, dragonscale hauberk as a water wizard, minor heal, the bimmelbammel hand). I try to limit those out of school spells to the level 1 spells. There are only very few level 2 out of school spells I consider putting into my spell book (heal, renewing spring, fireball/hurl boulder, force hold, battle forge).
That is the hardest part I have is deciding between some creatures and some nukes. I generally favor things that last a long time or at least multiple rounds.
This!
Mage wands as you said are great for that, although not having the mage wand dispelled has been an ongoing dilema of mine. I usually just save them for later game when resources of the other mage are getting depleted or they have more to worry about than my wand like a Vampire in their face.
Yeah, it hurts to get mage wand dissolved. It helps to save them for later game, but sometimes you cant since you dont want to use too many dispels/teleports/dissolves without putting them on a wand. To be honest, I include 3 mage wands into my wizard book. They are just too good.
Btw, a reason I love water wizard is that it's cheap to have 6 dissolves which is the counter for equipment (especially mage wand) heavy mages.
-
Agro's solution to this is the mage's basic attack, especially with Forcemaster who has Galvatar as a cantrip. Every action spent making attacks instead of casting spells saves spellbook the same way a wand might.
In the future, I hope we'll have a few more cantrips and other recurring effects so that turtling doesn't inevitably gain such a strong advantage the late game.
-
Thanks Charmyna. Since Wizard is my favorite Mage if you are accepting apprentices Wizards to learn from your sagely wisdom I'd like to sign up! :D
-
Thanks Charmyna. Since Wizard is my favorite Mage if you are accepting apprentices Wizards to learn from your sagely wisdom I'd like to sign up! :D
You are accepted as my apprentice. Go out and collect some mana flowers!
-
Thanks Charmyna. Since Wizard is my favorite Mage if you are accepting apprentices Wizards to learn from your sagely wisdom I'd like to sign up! :D
You are accepted as my apprentice. Go out and collect some mana flowers!
Stormmaster bows deeply to his mentor Charmyna and says "You won't regret your decision to take me on master. As I grow in power it will be a true testament to your mentoring and continue to build your legacy." The young apprentice Stormmaster grabs a pouch, dons his Elemental Cloak and races off to the forest near Charmyna's keep to gather Mana Flowers for his master. As Stormmaster gathers Mana Flowers he ponders his master's words on spell points and devises clever new ideas for his own spell books, eagerly awaiting his next lesson from Charmyna.
-
Thanks Charmyna. Since Wizard is my favorite Mage if you are accepting apprentices Wizards to learn from your sagely wisdom I'd like to sign up! :D
You are accepted as my apprentice. Go out and collect some mana flowers!
Stormmaster bows deeply to his mentor Charmyna and says "You won't regret your decision to take me on master. As I grow in power it will be a true testament to your mentoring and continue to build your legacy." The young apprentice Stormmaster grabs a pouch, dons his Elemental Cloak and races off to the forest near Charmyna's keep to gather Mana Flowers for his master. As Stormmaster gathers Mana Flowers he ponders his master's words on spell points and devises clever new ideas for his own spell books, eagerly awaiting his next lesson from Charmyna.
While his apprentice is making the forest an unsafer place to walk through, charmyna descends into the basement to feed the hydra with the remnants of his last battle versus the neighbouring Necromancer Urlock. "I hope Stormmaster knows to distinguish between Mana Flowers and Vine Snappers. Well, I guess Urlock wont mind training his reanimation skills anyway."
-
Good points brought up in the OP. I agree that spellpoints are important, I've always paid close attention to that stuff. Going out of school should be kept to mandatory cards because otherwise it reduces your flexibility. The mages that have to pay triple for certain spells should avoid putting those spells in as much as possible and limited to level 1 spells only. While having a Vampiress in your Priestess may be cute and all, it's just too expensive for a competitive build IMO.
This is what kills the Warlord the most I think. His channeling of 9 already hurts, but then add in the triple cost for Arcane spells (the most important school IMO) and it just cripples him. Any mage that has to pay triple for Arcane spells needs to be one bad mother in other areas...which the Warlord isn't.
However, aren't you a fan of the Grizzly in your Wizard build? Doesn't that go against the whole point of your thread? Or have you switched away from the Grizzly in favor of in school creatures?
-
Good points brought up in the OP. I agree that spellpoints are important, I've always paid close attention to that stuff. Going out of school should be kept to mandatory cards because otherwise it reduces your flexibility. The mages that have to pay triple for certain spells should avoid putting those spells in as much as possible and limited to level 1 spells only. While having a Vampiress in your Priestess may be cute and all, it's just too expensive for a competitive build IMO.
This is what kills the Warlord the most I think. His channeling of 9 already hurts, but then add in the triple cost for Arcane spells (the most important school IMO) and it just cripples him. Any mage that has to pay triple for Arcane spells needs to be one bad mother in other areas...which the Warlord isn't.
However, aren't you a fan of the Grizzly in your Wizard build? Doesn't that go against the whole point of your thread? Or have you switched away from the Grizzly in favor of in school creatures?
Yeah, I switched to gate of voltari and hydras/gremlins. The grizzly+battle forge build is quite nice as well, but I think this one is even stronger. It has a bigger creature pool and the gate in turn one increases channeling alot more compared to battle forge.
-
Yeah, it hurts to get mage wand dissolved. It helps to save them for later game, but sometimes you cant since you dont want to use too many dispels/teleports/dissolves without putting them on a wand. To be honest, I include 3 mage wands into my wizard book. They are just too good.
Btw, a reason I love water wizard is that it's cheap to have 6 dissolves which is the counter for equipment (especially mage wand) heavy mages.
I don't worry too much about getting a wand Dissolved really. I generally only play them off of a Battleforge, so when I deploy one it doesn't cost me an action and costs less mana. I also make sure to cast the spell that is bound to the wand on the same turn I play it so that I don't lose the spell without using it. When my opponent then Dissolves the wand they have to spend an action to do it and pay more mana than I did to cast it so I'm coming out ahead.
-
Good points brought up in the OP. I agree that spellpoints are important, I've always paid close attention to that stuff. Going out of school should be kept to mandatory cards because otherwise it reduces your flexibility. The mages that have to pay triple for certain spells should avoid putting those spells in as much as possible and limited to level 1 spells only. While having a Vampiress in your Priestess may be cute and all, it's just too expensive for a competitive build IMO.
This is what kills the Warlord the most I think. His channeling of 9 already hurts, but then add in the triple cost for Arcane spells (the most important school IMO) and it just cripples him. Any mage that has to pay triple for Arcane spells needs to be one bad mother in other areas...which the Warlord isn't.
However, aren't you a fan of the Grizzly in your Wizard build? Doesn't that go against the whole point of your thread? Or have you switched away from the Grizzly in favor of in school creatures?
Yeah, I switched to gate of voltari and hydras/gremlins. The grizzly+battle forge build is quite nice as well, but I think this one is even stronger. It has a bigger creature pool and the gate in turn one increases channeling alot more compared to battle forge.
Hmmm, interesting. I moved away from creature Spawnpoints a long time ago because they just seemed too slow vs aggro (and everyone and their brother seemed to be playing aggro). I'd like to see some of your games with the Gate to see how they playout. Is there a way to watch any of your older games that you've streamed?
-
Charmyna's games are recorded on his twitch feeds on OCTGN. In fact I just watched one where he played gate on turn 1. I think since the gate can get 3 mana per turn that is a nice boon and it pays off faster than some of the other spawnpoints, plus mana aside it gives you an extra action per turn. Use gate to summon a creature instead of wasting your full cast when you can use that for something else like an attack.
-
Charmyna's games are recorded on his twitch feeds on OCTGN. In fact I just watched one where he played gate on turn 1. I think since the gate can get 3 mana per turn that is a nice boon and it pays off faster than some of the other spawnpoints, plus mana aside it gives you an extra action per turn. Use gate to summon a creature instead of wasting your full cast when you can use that for something else like an attack.
Oh, I understand what the Spawnpoint brings to the table, I had just found them too expensive and a bit restrictive (since they can only summon a certain type of creature).
It's interesting that he's using Hydras. In the early days Hydras were all the rage, but then people started to adapt to them with things like high armor, Agony, and Aegis, all of which make the Hydra's Triplestrike pretty weak. However, recently I had been toying with the idea of trying them out again because I was wondering if people had stopped meta-gaming against them since they weren't showing up as much (now it's the Iron Golem that's all the rage).
I see I'm not alone in thinking this way ;)
-
Good points brought up in the OP. I agree that spellpoints are important, I've always paid close attention to that stuff. Going out of school should be kept to mandatory cards because otherwise it reduces your flexibility. The mages that have to pay triple for certain spells should avoid putting those spells in as much as possible and limited to level 1 spells only. While having a Vampiress in your Priestess may be cute and all, it's just too expensive for a competitive build IMO.
This is what kills the Warlord the most I think. His channeling of 9 already hurts, but then add in the triple cost for Arcane spells (the most important school IMO) and it just cripples him. Any mage that has to pay triple for Arcane spells needs to be one bad mother in other areas...which the Warlord isn't.
However, aren't you a fan of the Grizzly in your Wizard build? Doesn't that go against the whole point of your thread? Or have you switched away from the Grizzly in favor of in school creatures?
Yeah, I switched to gate of voltari and hydras/gremlins. The grizzly+battle forge build is quite nice as well, but I think this one is even stronger. It has a bigger creature pool and the gate in turn one increases channeling alot more compared to battle forge.
Hmmm, interesting. I moved away from creature Spawnpoints a long time ago because they just seemed too slow vs aggro (and everyone and their brother seemed to be playing aggro). I'd like to see some of your games with the Gate to see how they playout. Is there a way to watch any of your older games that you've streamed?
Aggro builds really are no problem at all since the wizard cant be focused down easily (actually I believe you cant kill a wizard without supporting creatures or without the wizard having finite life). The gate pays off so quickly that even if the opponent rushes with creatures, its not too hard to defend. Btw if the opponent tries to overwhelm me with creatures, it really helps to use the wizard for guarding (to protect gremlins or gate) and zapping while using the gate to spawn a hydra or gremlin and the wizard tower to make use of the remaining mana. That way even against someone who at the beginning uses most of his mana for creatures, I quickly get board control even though I spend alot of mana for gate+harmonize.
-
Charmyna's games are recorded on his twitch feeds on OCTGN. In fact I just watched one where he played gate on turn 1. I think since the gate can get 3 mana per turn that is a nice boon and it pays off faster than some of the other spawnpoints, plus mana aside it gives you an extra action per turn. Use gate to summon a creature instead of wasting your full cast when you can use that for something else like an attack.
What is the link for these?
-
Charmyna's games are recorded on his twitch feeds on OCTGN. In fact I just watched one where he played gate on turn 1. I think since the gate can get 3 mana per turn that is a nice boon and it pays off faster than some of the other spawnpoints, plus mana aside it gives you an extra action per turn. Use gate to summon a creature instead of wasting your full cast when you can use that for something else like an attack.
Oh, I understand what the Spawnpoint brings to the table, I had just found them too expensive and a bit restrictive (since they can only summon a certain type of creature).
It's interesting that he's using Hydras. In the early days Hydras were all the rage, but then people started to adapt to them with things like high armor, Agony, and Aegis, all of which make the Hydra's Triplestrike pretty weak. However, recently I had been toying with the idea of trying them out again because I was wondering if people had stopped meta-gaming against them since they weren't showing up as much (now it's the Iron Golem that's all the rage).
I see I'm not alone in thinking this way ;)
Armor helps against the hydras, but above 2 armor, the effect of armor decreases rapidly. Even against well armored targets, the hydra does nice damage. The point of the hydra is, that with 9 dices you roll alot of crits, hydra has inherent counterstrike and regen! The slow is no real problem since I include 4 teleports in my book anyway. Agony, weak and divine protection are a problem, but thats where 6 dispels and purify shine at. Not many play divine protection these days anyway.
Btw, if fighting against the necromancers zombies, piercing (e.g. grizzly or deathpact slayer) wont matter at all. Additionally it will make no difference that the hydra strikes three times instead of one big hit. The only thing that matters against zombies is total dice amount (and maybe conditions like daze, stun and burn). Considering total dice amounts noone can beat the hydra.
You talked about the spawnpoint being restricive. You got a point here and this is why for a long time I preferred to use battle forge as a spawnpoint instead (i think you really need a spawnpoint to win). But, after playing with the gate+gremlins+hydra+gargoyle+gorgon archer, I dont feel like this restriction hurts that much. There has not been a situation that I could not manage with the five creatures listed (and maybe huginn). Earth golems are really nice for sure, but I prefer to be water wizard and to rely on gate+arcane creatures.
Charmyna's games are recorded on his twitch feeds on OCTGN. In fact I just watched one where he played gate on turn 1. I think since the gate can get 3 mana per turn that is a nice boon and it pays off faster than some of the other spawnpoints, plus mana aside it gives you an extra action per turn. Use gate to summon a creature instead of wasting your full cast when you can use that for something else like an attack.
What is the link for these?
Its here:
http://www.twitch.tv/charmyna
I will stream a few more games with the gate opening soon.
-
I know this isn't the Wizard Strategy thread (I should make one or look one up), but one of my favorite ones (especially when guarding the gate or a wizard tower) is 2 Gorgon Archers + Hydra/Gargoyle/etc for defense.
By the time something actually gets in range to do damage to your gate or tower it is so plugged full of holes from arrows and so weak from the archers putting out 2-4 weak counters per round that it hits like a little kitten. Also a great way to take down a Grizzly or Golem or those 'big guys', they aren't so bad with a pile of weak conditions on.
-
I know this isn't the Wizard Strategy thread (I should make one or look one up), but one of my favorite ones (especially when guarding the gate or a wizard tower) is 2 Gorgon Archers + Hydra/Gargoyle/etc for defense.
By the time something actually gets in range to do damage to your gate or tower it is so plugged full of holes from arrows and so weak from the archers putting out 2-4 weak counters per round that it hits like a little kitten. Also a great way to take down a Grizzly or Golem or those 'big guys', they aren't so bad with a pile of weak conditions on.
Gorgon archers are nice, but their big weakness is being teleported into the opponents horde and most good players use teleport alot! Because of the minimum range the gorgon archer cant even use his attack in this scenario.
On the other side, if your opponent teleports your hydra into his death zone, the hydra can still use its full attack and inherent counterstrike (unless its incapped).
-
I do wonder about Water Wizard's match up against a lightly metagamed Earth Wizard. Earth is probably still very strong against everything else, and Iron Golems seem good against Wizard's Tower, Hydras, and Gorgon Archers, while Archers are ideal against Hydras. Any thoughts?
-
Yet another excellent OP by Charmyna.
However, I would caution against a tendency to view things in black and white. "It's all about the spell points". "Mana generation over damage". "Grizzly Bear and Sniper". "Guardian Angel and Vampiress". Each iteration as the meta-game evolves is stated very confidently.
But the metagame evolves (even without releases). And opinon-makers, talented players with influence like Charmyna, should beware of creating fashions and shaping the meta!
I have found playing other games in my local meta that we have been guilty of "group think". We suddenly encounter someone else at a GamesCon who plays in a different way and we (secretly) think what a numpty and then he thrashes us. Because he is exploiting our group think and leveraging the flaws in it.
That Priestess Temple Crawl win is a good example of finding a "gap in the meta". I believe many followed Piousflea's super-aggressive Warlock build with their own variants and this played into the Priestess.
The tone of this post is about playing "attritional defensive Wizard" and is primarily focused at wizard vs. wizard "because wizard is best". This becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy! Defensive wizard is best hence the most dangerous opponent is another defensive wizard hence defensive wizard becomes even better.
I am not contesting what's been written here (very valid points), just the black-and-white super confidence that this is 100% the best way. It's more complicated than that, a game of greys thankfully.
In case I did not make it clear (I don't embarrassingly gush, I'm a silent fan of Charmyna, I have chided someone for pooh-poohing the Jet Stream-Thorns-Push "trick"), the opening post has very good points and is definitely true when you build a book for an attritional strategy.
But consider the value of toolbox. By sticking entirely in school (except mandatories), you sacrifice flexibility of having the ideal answer to every situation. I'm not saying toolbox is better. Just that there is a very real trade-off here that has not been given voice. The view here is said so confidently (and is highly respected) but is also if you analyse it quite unbalanced. Valshalla in a Beastmaster swarm build as she works so well against Iron and the meta has moved against anti-swarm cards? Surely it's all about being 1 step ahead of the curve?
Another excellent thought-provoking post, even if I think it needs a few disclaimers, more blurring of what is presented as "gospel truth".
-
I do wonder about Water Wizard's match up against a lightly metagamed Earth Wizard. Earth is probably still very strong against everything else, and Iron Golems seem good against Wizard's Tower, Hydras, and Gorgon Archers, while Archers are ideal against Hydras. Any thoughts?
I havent faced many earth wizards with this build, so im not sure.
To compare the strength of creatures I like throwing them in a one zone arena and let them fight each other. The iron golem would do something like 5 damage each turn. The hydra will do like 4.5 crits each turn from her full attack and 2 crits from the counterstrike. Additionally the hydra will regen two damage. Therefore, at the beginning of the second round the golem will have 6.5 damage on him (maybe even more if the hydra rolls high normal damage) whereas the hydra will have 3 damage on her. Sure this is very simplified, but I think it shows that iron golem is not per se better than the hydra - even if you count in the higher mana cost of the hydra. Sure the golem has great traits, but still its not like an earth wizard has a huge advantage if fighting against a water wizard because he has golems vs hydra.
Golems are good against wizard tower, but hydras arent bad as well.
Gorgon Archers are great against Hydras if they shoot first. But, if the archer is teleported before he can shoot the hydra, then the archer is gone soon. Btw a gargoyle is great to protect the hydra from weaks. In the end, a game of gorgon archer vs hydra+gargoyle is very tricky and its difficult to say which one would win. To come to the point, I would not say that gorgon archers are ideal against hydras. They are for sure better against hydras as against other strong creatures (e.g. grizzly). But its not like archers totally counter hydras.
Yet another excellent OP by Charmyna.
However, I would caution against a tendency to view things in black and white. "It's all about the spell points". "Mana generation over damage". "Grizzly Bear and Sniper". "Guardian Angel and Vampiress". Each iteration as the meta-game evolves is stated very confidently.
But metagames evolve, especially with new cards. And opinon-makers, talented players with influence like Charmyna, should beware of creating fashions and shaping the meta!
I have found playing other games in my local meta that we have been guilty of "group think". We suddenly encounter someone else at a GamesCon who plays in a different way and we (secretly) think what a numpty and then he thrashes us. Because he is exploiting our group think and leveraging the flaws in it.
That Priestess Temple Crawl win is a good example of finding a "gap in the meta". I believe many followed Piousflea's super-aggressive Warlock build with their own variants and this played into the Priestess.
The tone of this post is about playing "attritional defensive Wizard" and is primarily focused at wizard vs. wizard "because wizard is best". This becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy! Defensive wizard is best hence the most dangerous opponent is another defensive wizard hence defensive wizard becomes even better.
I am not contesting what's been written here (very valid points), just the black-and-white super confidence that this is 100% the best way. It's more complicated than that, a game of greys thankfully.
In case I did not make it clear (I don't embarrassingly gush, I'm a silent fan of Charmyna, I have chided someone for pooh-poohing the Jet Stream-Thorns-Push "trick"), the opening post has very good points and is definitely true when you build you build for an attritional strategy.
But consider the value of toolbox. By sticking entirely in school (except mandatories), you sacrifice flexibility of having the ideal answer to every situation. I'm not saying toolbox is better. Just that there is a very real trade-off here that has not been given voice. The view here is said so confidently (and is highly respected) but is also if you analyse quite unbalanced. Valshalla in a Beastmaster swarm build as she works so well against Iron and the meta has moved against anti-swarm cards? Surely it's all about being 1 step ahead of the curve?
Yet another excellent thought-provoking post, even if I think it needs a few disclaimers, more blurring of what is presented as "gospel truth".
You got me :). I know there is not only black and white - especially not in Mage Wars. But, its often very difficult to paint all colors between black and white. And btw, I wanted the OP to start a fruitful discussion filled with approval and disapproval. Pressing ones point clearly, without too much doubts, helps to provoke a discussion. I know there is not one truth, there never is, and I apologize if the OP conveys that impression.
But consider the value of toolbox. By sticking entirely in school (except mandatories), you sacrifice flexibility of having the ideal answer to every situation. I'm not saying toolbox is better. Just that there is a very real trade-off here that has not been given voice. The view here is said so confidently (and is highly respected) but is also if you analyse quite unbalanced. Valshalla in a Beastmaster swarm build as she works so well against Iron and the meta has moved against anti-swarm cards? Surely it's all about being 1 step ahead of the curve?
Yeah, I dont want to discourage exploring new ways or building a flexible spell book. Its just those out of school cards should have a noticable impact on the game which makes them worth the extra cost. For example, the sunfire amulet if dissolved soon has a very small impact compared to the spell point cost. On the other side, renewing spring has similar spell point cost but might have a much bigger impact since its a conjuration that cant be dissolved the next round. To be honest, im not sure how good renewing spring is, I still need more experience with it. The point is, that you should make sure that those out of school cards stay long enough in the game to make them worth the extra cost.
Another example are creatures. IMO an out of school creature really needs to have a very noticable benefit compared to an in school creature or otherwise I would prefer to take two in school creatures instead. The Grimson Sniper might be such an example since he is the only ranged creature with range 3. The grizzly is another example because its base values compared to mana cost are so great (although I still prefer two hydras over grizzly).
Another example is heal (the level 2 one). If, as a wizard, you use heal to save a hydra, its not a great move IMO (unless its from a mage wand). The heal costs 4 spell points as does the hydra. Therefore I would prefer to summon another hydra instead of healing one. This is different if you use heal to save an out of school creature or maybe even an in school creature with a couple enchantments since in this case the saved spell points will be alot more compared to the spell points used for heal.
If you use heal to save your mage, its a totally different story anyway.
Oh, and if you think about 2 in school creatures vs 1 out of school creature or 1 in school creature+heal, you need to consider this: In practice a creature absorbs more damage than it has life. This is because in most cases your opponent will do more damage with the last hit than the creatures remaining life. This is much in favor of two creatures as compared to one creature+heal etc.
-
Another example is heal (the level 2 one). If, as a wizard, you use heal to save a hydra, its not a great move IMO (unless its from a mage wand). The heal costs 4 spell points as does the hydra. Therefore I would prefer to summon another hydra instead of healing one.
Be careful here, as we have discussed yes they are both 4 spell book points, but one is a FC and the other is a QC. You can heal the Hydra during the First QC phase and have him hit hard THAT turn or you could summon another Hydra that will do nothing till the next round, expect maybe get beat up or teleported off some where useless.
-
Charmyna you always made the book before I evern finished thinking about it....I loathe and appreciate u at the same time
I've been trying to test this out but u beat me to it dratz .
-
This is quite the interesting take on spellbook building, but I think this applies really only to the Wizard at the moment. Don't worry, I do have a reason. The Wizard really has the most options as far as staying in school. Every other build you CAN build kind of needs outside help.
As well, this doesn't really take into account the Nature enchantments, which can be duplicated with commands, but at the same cost, which to splash is an important decision.
But, like I said, Wizard is the easiest to stay in school, as he has the most varied, and some of the best options in the game at the moment. Any splash you or I may use is in an effort to change the damage output and tempo of the natural Wizard build, and can be effective, but also very punishing, as below average dice rolls can hurt the day.
As well, there are certain curses I'm probably going to always run one of. Yes, there are often exceptions in which I won't include them, but they often are so important in the late game it's hard to leave home without them. Ghoul Rot, for example, is critical to gaining tempo in the late game banking on the waste of a dispel (yes, it's a card for a card and an action for an action, as well as 8 mana for 8 mana, but I'm using my action to act, while my opponent is forced to react, thereby giving me a turn). But, it's not always necessary.
-
(yes, it's a card for a card and an action for an action, as well as 8 mana for 8 mana, but I'm using my action to act, while my opponent is forced to react, thereby giving me a turn). But, it's not always necessary.
Especially if you save it for the Final QC Phase of the OP Mages Init :)
-
This is quite the interesting take on spellbook building, but I think this applies really only to the Wizard at the moment. Don't worry, I do have a reason. The Wizard really has the most options as far as staying in school. Every other build you CAN build kind of needs outside help.
This could potentially explain why the Wizard has for the most part been the dominating build (although the Warlock had his day too).
-
And now we have a Mage with 1st level Water spells as a trained class with the Druid for those that like those dissolves they only take up 1 point. : )
-
This is quite the interesting take on spellbook building, but I think this applies really only to the Wizard at the moment. Don't worry, I do have a reason. The Wizard really has the most options as far as staying in school. Every other build you CAN build kind of needs outside help.
This could potentially explain why the Wizard has for the most part been the dominating build (although the Warlock had his day too).
This and cheap spells from one elemental school, voltaric shield, zap, wizard tower and great spawnpoint. Arcane school is for sure the biggest strength of the wizard, but all the other stuff mentioned is really great as well leading to the wizard as the lonely champion.
-
I agree- Spell points are very much a tempo in this game as card advantage,mana generation, and early leads.
I think this is something that has not really been said much before- so amazing job OP.
I often think about how much mana I have to use to counter something of my opponents and vice versa. If I have paid more to get rid of something that my opponent has, and he has paid less- I know I have just caused a mana disadvantage for myself. I dont often think about the spell points aspect of it much- So I feel like keeping that into consideration makes me a better player.
Again, great job.