Arcane Wonders Forum
Mage Wars => General Discussion => Topic started by: Sylex on January 30, 2014, 07:00:08 PM
-
First off, I am no expert by far, but let me tell you about my personal opinion of sir Wizard. The first thing I did when I bought Mage Wars was look at the mage cards (no not the ones with the pretty pictures, the ones with all the info). The first thing I noticed about the Wizard was that he had no triple cost drawbacks when it came to spell selection like all 3 of the others. Right then, I thought OK I guess the Arcane school is so specialized that he NEEDS the support from other schools. Then as I looked through the cards, I saw a completely different story. The Arcane school of magic is the best most well rounded school of magic in the game in my opinion. I mean there's no bad part about it.......AT ALL. It has downright disgusting cards in all forms. Here's a small list just off the top
Creatures : Darkfenne hydra (great cost for something boasting this many dice.)
Gorgon Archer (arguably one of the best ranged fighters in the game)
Conjurations : Mana Crystal (best static channel increase imo)
Gate to Voltari (its like a better Lair for a mage that shouldn't even have such things)
Wizards Tower (read the card)
Mana Siphon (this is just ONE of the gross ways Wizards are gonna zap your mana)
Equipment : Suppression Cloak (ya, that'll do)
Elemental Cloak (the one everyone else takes)
Enchantments Incantations, and all that other stuff : For this I'm just going to point out that Arcane has so many spells that are considered MUST HAVES its ridiculous. Dispell (this should have been a novice spell IMO), Nullify (yup this old chestnut) , Jinx (another novice spell candidate), Teleport ( ya....that OP "when you absolutely need to put your enemy right where you need him for cheap" card that EVERY image uses or else you're doing it wrong) yup also Arcane.
So where do we go from here? I mean even to a new player like myself it seems the favor is skewed towards the Wizard right out of the box. Well personally I think two things need to be changed right away. Now I'm no game tester or balancing guru, hell I wouldn't even consider myself a great player, but in all fairness, the Wizard should have a triple cost spell penalty of some sort just like EVERYONE else. Strictly in the sense of theme, and logic I think it should be the Nature or War school. I think the calm orderly ways of nature contrast nicely to the chaotic nature of arcane magic. Also the art of war would make sense in that it is probably closer to being the opposite of arcane in a physical sense. Magic vs Technology if you will. I'm leaning towards the Nature side more in terms of balance even though I think the War school makes more sense in terms of element. Then I would make Dispell a novice spell ( I mean seriously, every mage is almost forced to run this.) I think Jinx should be as well but that's up to debate. Then Teleport needs to be errata'd to be a Non-mage creature & zone target spell, and possibly Magecast as well. There can be a Teleport for enemy mages as well but not for 3 mana a square.
Now, all that said.....of course I love the Wizard (of course I like winning) but I shouldn't have that feeling of depression when I see one across the arena. I know its gonna be a long battle full of control magic and ridiculously powerful conjurations. When I'm playing other mages it seems like I eventually run out of steam if things don't go as planned while playing as a Wizard, I feel like McGyver. I almost ALWAYS have a better answer than my opponent.......or so it seems.
I have played Mage Wars about a dozen times now so again I am no expert, but after almost 2 decades of playing MtG, I know how to read cards, and spot a few things. This is just my opinion, and I don't mean to upset anyone, but by the same token I implore you to convince me that the Holy School of magic is just as strong, well rounded, and fun to play as Arcane.
-
Welcome, Sylex. I absolutely love your forthright, opinionated style!
Reminds me of another MtG player I know...
I feel you are entirely right on all points. Your MtG training puts you ahead of the curve for your experience.
I suspect the approach being adopted is NOT to change card text wherever possible but to either
(a) release counters
(b) tweak the rules via a Living FAQ
What this means is the Wizard comes out strongest in the 1 Core Set card pool.
Even without Tower, Transfusion, Jelly, Gargoyle etc (as other mages are similarly limited to Core pool)
This imbalance may put off new players, especially MtG players where Control builds are bread-n-butter.
When trying to convince my MtG players to get into this game, they are put off by this blatant imbalance.
It is harming the game and future cards nerfing Wizard will not help as they will not buy them and are lost.
I think the decision to simply not errata Teleport to Exclude Enemy Mage is the most harmful decision
I also agree that Dispel should be Novice (this also helps Warlord), leave Purge and Steal as Wizardly
Both of these decisions would reduce the spell point tax on builds hence promote more creativity
I would stop at there, at least for the moment
(Whilst adding errata, they could revert Battle Fury to as is, Temple of Light to just Epic, keeping Hand as Unique)
An errata to a Mage Card's text (to hurt the Wizard) is a major step
I wish they would (Wizard Training, Battle Orders, Wounded Prey etc) but here I understand their retiscence
It really would be too much of an admission that they got it wrong
MtG players are very comfortable with card text changes and even rule changes
However the target audience of this game aren't MtG players (who lets face it are "analyse cards and abuse them" mindset)
It's for a more relaxed fun experience I feel
When I play Mage Wars, I play it for the experience (like a RPG) as much as for the competitive element
Oh, who am I kidding, I'm an MtG Spike, I play to win
But seriously, as experienced MtG players, our optimising minds can sometimes be alien to their theme based decisions
You've no idea how theme, not strategy and "what is good for the game meta?", seems to be more of a driving force.
And I don't think that's necessarily a bad thing because here, you can't equip a Loxodon Warhammer to a Bird of Paradise.
It is more of an immersive experience.
They also want to avoid "status effects", "triggered effects", "effects on the stack" and such complications.
And on this point, I wholeheartedly agree, just to differentiate the game and make it more accessible.
The Lifetime Value / Return on Investment dimension makes it far deeper than many give it credit for.
And there are many Resources to manage and balance, as well as the complete freedom of Double Tutor.
The "let's play with Trading Folders" was a genius USP and I'm surprised other games haven't copied it.
Mage Wars has so much going for it - but it doesn't do itself favours sometimes with stubborn decisions etc
As a longtime MtG player, you must remember how broken it was (Ancestral Recall = blue Giant Growth?)
Now compare Magic to Mage Wars at the 2 years old maturity; Mage Wars really is way ahead of the curve.
Once you accept it's a hybrid of MtG and D&D, just embrace the experience and you will get more out of it.
It took me a while to "change gear" from my uber-competitive MtG midset (I still abuse cards horrendously, bad habits).
I totally agree with all you wrote but now I just chill, it's not Pro Tour Magic with a $1 Million prize money.
It's a game where players can live out their Mage fantasies and just have fun escaping into the Arena.
Btw: they are really nice people and as a small Indie company, they do listen to their fanbase.
If you ever experience their Customer Service, I am told by my friends it is absolutely amazing.
So every time I am critical (to provoke a perceived benefit to their game), I feel pangs of guilt.
(I loved the title of this thread too. More please!)
-
Thanks DB. I've always enjoyed reading your posts as well. I understand what you mean about changing the Wizard stat card and it being detrimental to the integrity of an already established game. I just wish they had gotten it right from the get go. I also hope that in attempts to balance the other schools that they don't go the opposite direction and make Arcane LESS fun to play (don't know if that's possible but I hope not)
I also agree that this game is a lot lighter than MtG, with more of an RPG feel, and that's probably what I love most about it. I really feel like a MAGE in this game, and not the elitist of probabilities that I become when I play MtG, but on the other hand, trying to NOT be that way after years of magic is not an easy transition.
I plan on playing this game for a long time, and if I didn't love it so much, I wouldn't be so critical. I'm so afraid that Wizard is gonna fall into that category of hatred that a lot of magic cards have endured. That point where as soon as you lay your Wizard down on the table, people just quit the game, or as soon as you play two cards people are gonna say you copied Charmyna or that you are net decking. This is why I don't play Magic anymore because as soon as you play a creature that is remotely better than a Grizzly Bear people accuse you of "netdecking" as if you couldn't obviously tell that Delver of Secrets was a good card just by reading it before it won every tournament that year. I mean all anyone had to do was READ the card to see how good it is, but oh my god if you put that in a deck you were just copying the other ten million people that read the card before you did.
When it comes to Mage Wars, that kind of mentality can kill this game. In the case of magic, nobody cares because there's always someone else who plays it. That's a bad place to be for any game regardless of its popularity.
When I play this game I fully intend to win, but at the same time I also expect to lose. Either way, I have learned something new. I just don't want the lesson learned to be "If you want to beat a Wizard, play as a Wizard"
-
I'm not sure how I would balance the wizard. Overall I think arcane wonders has done a good job, but arcane is a little too powerful which explains both the wizards strength and the warlords weakness. I am strongly against changing card text, though. I can understand it occasionally being necessary, but that should be a last resort. The biggest problem currently is the tower. I never had too much trouble facing a wizard till the tower was released. And the warlord needs some non arcane options for dealing with enchantments. I believe pushes are a decent substitute for teleport. Generally though I trust them to make things balanced and fun.
-
I'm not sure how I would balance the wizard. Overall I think arcane wonders has done a good job, but arcane is a little too powerful which explains both the wizards strength and the warlords weakness.
I would love to comment on this but I can not. :-\
-
I have faith in Arcane Wonders. I'm sure they realize all these points people have been making and I know they will take them into consideration when developing new cards. They can't make everyone happy; it just isn't possible.
However, this is a relatively new game and AW has many strong years ahead of them and many cards planned. I have faith that while the game is currently slightly unbalanced, it will balance itself out in the years to come.
-
This imbalance may put off new players, especially MtG players where Control builds are bread-n-butter.
When trying to convince my MtG players to get into this game, they are put off by this blatant imbalance.
It is harming the game and future cards nerfing Wizard will not help as they will not buy them and are lost.
This is a pretty big fear of mine as well since the only people I know who would actually sit down for a game of Mage Wars are ALL very competent MtG players.
Myself included, when I look at the Arcane school, I see nothing but Blue. Its a school that has the most "meta" spells, and you don't have to use it, but then again its a different story in Mage Wars. With a system based on points the sacrifice is different to include it in your spellbook. With Blue I have to completely alter the probabilities of everything else I'm going to use in order to include it in my deck. Here, I just pay a little more points and I can use it no problem. So with a system like that, MY brain says that the only thing I'm going to "lose" per se when adding Arcane to my spellbook is the size of my spellbook if I'm NOT a Wizard. So on the other hand my brain also seems to be under the assumption that with the Wizard having cheaper access to every school of magic not only does he pay cover price for Arcane, but he is also sneaking spells out the back of the store because he can play MORE of everything else than the other mages. So maybe he should have had less overall points to spend? That's the question my friend posed to me. Again that's talking about fixing the Wizard himself, and I understand that would be taking the easy way out.
I absolutely agree that in comparison to MtG, Mage Wars has gotten it RIGHT as far as card mistakes, and honestly I have so much respect for AW putting this game into the world that even if they released a game called Mage Wars 2 "We Fixed The Wizard" I would hand over my money. I know they are much more intelligent, just making a jest at my addiction.
I think they should really consider their "Novice" list of spells though because when it comes to what mages have to pay for in order to use a spell, nobody is going to want to pay a premium for something EVERY mage needs to use. I mean what makes Decoy a novice spell, and not Dispell? That's the question I ask myself every time I make a spellbook.
-
Coming from a Warhammer background instead of an MtG background I was just impressed that the balance was good enough that only one mage is considered OP and one considered unplayable. I'm also pleased that the expected buy-in before you can really start playing is $50 instead of $500.
-
I came from a back ground in Hero Clix, not MtG. I'm honestly very impressed with how balanced the game is. There's only one mage people seem to think is over powered and I don't even personally think he's that bad. Strong certainly but manageable. The one thing I've learned from playing clix is that anything can be taken down if you just approach it from the right angle.
-
I came from a back ground in Hero Clix, not MtG. I'm honestly very impressed with how balanced the game is. There's only one mage people seem to think is over powered and I don't even personally think he's that bad. Strong certainly but manageable. The one thing I've learned from playing clix is that anything can be taken down if you just approach it from the right angle.
I was third highest rank judges in the country for about 18months till I sold off my Clix collection. I have been and will continue to play on a very competitive level no matter what game I am playing. One of the things I love most about this community is our willingness to share info between different play groups. AW does care about the growth of this game and the community. As proof I can tell you that before we start to FiF we had 6 mages on the upcoming list. The pair that got the most votes was alt wiz and alt lock. AW knew that the warlord needed more work so it got placed in with the lock and we started brainstorming for FiF.
-
The game is great fun, despite attempts to value destruct it.
The people who front-face the public are really nice.
The forum tolerates criticism far beyond other forums.
What's there not to like?
WhizKids released an obviously broken Clix like Spiral
Then they nerfed her beyond playability
How big are WhizKids compared to AW?
Let's give AW break.
They do listen to their fans.
They are making changes.
A Core Set alone is quite balanced.
It was a combination of expansions that made Wizards what they are.
Wizard's Tower, Devouring Jelly, Gargoyle. Iron Golem, Transfusion etc.
None of those cards are in Core Set.
How many times have MtG curbed their excesses of giving Blue too much?
The current imbalance is not in the same scale as MtG historic imbalances.
I am not a fan of AW's approach - but they are listening.
Your posts actually do shape the way the game develops.
Which is pretty rewarding really. Just be patient and see.
-
The fact that this game draws so many different types of gamers surely speaks for its appeal. I mean the game is phenomenal, and I would recommend it to anyone. I certainly don't think that Wizard is so strong as to break the game. I just think he is slightly skewed. Maybe he is just my nemesis, and I have to criticize or maybe he is my favorite, and I'm just not sure if I can turn my back on the Warlock. Either way, the game certainly has so much potential expansion wise that anything that seems a little off can certainly be shifted later (as an MtG player, I'm certainly used to this).
I can't wait to see what the future brings, and I also can't wait to play more Mage Wars so maybe one day I might actually know what the hell I'm talking about. As of now, I'm still an apprentice to all these magical shenanigans.
-
Well, I have a minimum of two opinions... 3 or 4 if I can ;)
-
Well, I have a minimum of two opinions... 3 or 4 if I can ;)
HAHAHA Well I certainly am breaking some rules as far as how many opinions I sneak into my spellbooks.
-
I came from a back ground in Hero Clix, not MtG. I'm honestly very impressed with how balanced the game is. There's only one mage people seem to think is over powered and I don't even personally think he's that bad. Strong certainly but manageable. The one thing I've learned from playing clix is that anything can be taken down if you just approach it from the right angle.
I was third highest rank judges in the country for about 18months till I sold off my Clix collection. I have been and will continue to play on a very competitive level no matter what game I am playing. One of the things I love most about this community is our willingness to share info between different play groups. AW does care about the growth of this game and the community. As proof I can tell you that before we start to FiF we had 6 mages on the upcoming list. The pair that got the most votes was alt wiz and alt lock. AW knew that the warlord needed more work so it got placed in with the lock and we started brainstorming for FiF.
Ok I'm not quite certain what you mean here Shadow. Do you disagree with my assessment of the game and the Wizard? If so cool, you been playing longer but my opinions still my own. As a former high ranking clix judge the one thing you should be familiar with in that community is what I call the "doom of the week" cliché where there's always some new "unbeatable" broken something or another. Firelord, Feat Cards, Team Bases, etc. Do you remember how beatable every single one of those cases were? Very. I was a judge too, back when they had rankings, I even remember the tests you took for it. I'm still a judge actually and I play supremely competitive when the need arises(you can't just go beating the crap out of your local venue every week or you won't have one though I did win fifty bucks Thursday night at mine :)) I've never bought into the "unbeatable" anything in clix, after 12 years of playing it I've seen it as bologna too many times. I'm just conditioned to not believe in it in Mage Wars as well. Wizards are cool but they aint Vet Icons Superman powerful.
Do you just want to point out how great the AW team is in terms of keeping in touch with the fan base and their opinions? I whole heartedly agree 100%! Really nice to see that in a game company. Words can't describe how much I'm looking forward to FiF.
Due to the growth of my local group I can finally free up enough of my own cards that I think I'll build me a Wizard or two and thus study this from the inside.
-
Its 530am just took 1st at MTG born event. Must remember to reply later
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well it slowed down at work this morning.
So I have some time to respond.
Lets define a few things before I move on.
Metagame - The composition of build archetypes in a particular format/tournament. Metagame can go from a store or play group level all the way out to a global level.
Tier One - The build at the top of the metagame. These are generally considered to be the best in a particular format. Tier lists are made by comparing how favorable your matchups are and how many good matchups you have in total, generally by community consensus. You then assign a score based on these results and rank them from best to worst.
When most people talk about the current meta they are looking at the games played on OCTGN (http://octgn.gamersjudgement.com/wordpress/magewars/)and the event results that are posted. With that knowledge people then rate the mages and sort then into different levels of power. This is not to say that the lower powered mages cant win just it is not likely if both are played by equal skilled players.
So whats makes that the wizard tier 1 in the current meta. Wizards have no school at triple cost and the toolbox spells in arcane are at normal cost. Other mages currently have some triple cost and are double for arcane cost. For the same reasons this puts the Warlord at tier 3, paying triple for arcane causes a player to make cuts in other places when building if they what a good arcane tool package.
( This next part is where I would say what would be the path need to balance out the mages again but since I am on design team I can not. Yes we are watch the meta as it changes and grows. ) We are always mindful of what is going on with the current state of the game.
PS: Yes MW does have formats for example we could play all base set or all apprentice books. We could play DvN / FvW but most people choose to play all sets with no promos.
-
Its 530am just took 1st at MTG born event. Must remember to reply later
Congrats! What did you run? Was there any teleporting involved sir?
-
Its 530am just took 1st at MTG born event. Must remember to reply later
Congrats! What did you run? Was there any teleporting involved sir?
For Born unto Gods I played BW and got 2 demons 1 Arcon token gen and enoungh kill to run 5 main deck
-
The only mage who is really affected by triple cost for spells is the Warlord, paying triple for arcane makes him not worth playing (I built a Warlord spell book then realized I could make an Earth Mage that would be better) especially when there are not enough high level war spells. The other mages that have to pay triple such as the Warlock and the Priestess really are not hindered very much because neither mage uses spells from the schools they are penalized. I am glad that the new mages are schooled in two schools instead of having a penalty that really never came into play anyways.
-
The only mage who is really affected by triple cost for spells is the Warlord, paying triple for arcane makes him not worth playing (I built a Warlord spell book then realized I could make an Earth Mage that would be better) especially when there are not enough high level war spells. The other mages that have to pay triple such as the Warlock and the Priestess really are not hindered very much because neither mage uses spells from the schools they are penalized. I am glad that the new mages are schooled in two schools instead of having a penalty that really never came into play anyways.
Almost agree with this. Warlord needs more War/Command spells, maybe Warlord only creatures.
Can't wait FIF !!! :o
CYA
G.
-
I'm not sure how I would balance the wizard. Overall I think arcane wonders has done a good job, but arcane is a little too powerful which explains both the wizards strength and the warlords weakness.
I would love to comment on this but I can not. :-\
All these promises...
Such an interesting dilemma though for the company. The easiest thing to do logically would be to tweak the mages themselves, rather than change every card, but I guess that is not going to happen.
The issues facing the warlord are entrenched indeed, most fundamentally that it appears to be based on a couple of ideas (build a fortress, command an army) that simply do not work, given the surprisingly weak tools it has to do the job, and the striking limitations it has built in (conjurations that can't be placed next to each other, siege weapons that fire only every other turn, low mana, builders that take forever to do anything etc)
Every bit of frustration the OP feels over the apparent advantages of the wizard is mirrored in frustration over the manifest disadvantages of the warlord.
Intrigued to see what you pull out of the hat here.
-
When I originally made this post, I had not even looked at the Warlord yet. These were pretty much all first impressions just from buying the core set, and CoK. Now that I own all the cards, I have to say that I haven't the slightest interest in even attempting to build a Warlord, as it looks from the cards that it would be the equivalent of bringing a knife to a gun fight. The spells in Arcane are just too important in my opinion to have such a steep cost, and meanwhile the Wizard gets free reign of every school without any penalty at all, not to mention he gets to choose TWO different schools to play regular price for while everyone else only gets one (other than the Warlord, who even with two schools at regular cost, he is totally neutered by his weakness to Arcane)
That should speak pretty loudly in my opinion that if you aren't going to change the mages, something needs to be done spell wise to even pique my interest in playing a Warlord (and believe me, I WANT to play him).
Maybe have some smaller troops for him that can use an action the same turn they are summoned (a la Haste from MtG) since he seems like a pretty "Red" mage. I mean there HAS to be something that can be done to even things out. I wish AW all the best in their struggle to make every mage as viable, and fun to play as any other, because that should be one of the main goals in creating new things is making people WANT to play with them. So far, I'm just not even close to wanting to make a book for the Warlord.
-
That should speak pretty loudly in my opinion that if you aren't going to change the mages, something needs to be done spell wise to even pique my interest in playing a Warlord.
Assuming no changes to the mage card, and that the changes will instead come through new spells, will this expansion become obligatory to make the warlord viable? Will it make cards like the goblin builder viable?
I feel there are some great possibilities with the command system - 'Get a move on!', lets minions take a full action as a quick action, or 'Load the machines!’, lets a goblin add a load token to a siege engine etc. But it may all have too many knock on consequences.
Interesting stuff for AW.
-
We've put a lot of time and effort into the cards for Forged in Flame. The Warlord has always been a favorite of mine. We've really approached this set with the Warlord in mind. He's looking to get all new tools and some pretty unique cards.
I read all of these posts as they go up, and I contemplate on your feedback. I wanted to work on Forged in Fire, because I wanted a chance to give the warlord some legs. I'm very proud of the work we've done, especially the work of our playtesters. No game turns on a dime, but I hope when you get to see Forged in Fire you'll see that we want to listen to our players. We love this game as much as you guys and we want to see it prosper.
As always, feel free to email me if you have any concerns.
-
No game turns on a dime, but I hope when you get to see Forged in Fire you'll see that we want to listen to our players.
Of this I have NO doubt, and I honestly can't wait to see what you've done.
Even if it seems obligatory to get FiF to make Warlord "worth it" I would gladly lay my money down for that chance.
I personally don't feel obligated. I mean for someone who just wants to play an awesome board game on the weekends every blue moon, the Warlord would seem very fun, and would be just fine, but for someone like myself who been playing competitive card games for a while, I analyze, and calculate, playtest, then analyze and calculate some more, and the difference becomes a lot clearer as to what is "good" and what is not "viable". I believe those are relative terms in regards to the player. It only really matters if you plan on being competitive, but on the other hand, everyone wants to win.
Since MW has more of an LCG feel to it than just a weekend board game, I would say that buying an expansion is just a given for making the game better, and not a mandatory purchase. I don't plan on BEING competitive, but at the same time I want to PLAY competitive because I play a lot, and I also want to win.
Win or lose, I'm always going to want to see what new ideas, and strategies the AW team has in store for all us would-be know-it-all CCG players. I'm sure it will be worth every penny. Godspeed gentlemen.
-
No game turns on a dime, but I hope when you get to see Forged in Fire you'll see that we want to listen to our players.
Of this I have NO doubt, and I honestly can't wait to see what you've done.
Even if it seems obligatory to get FiF to make Warlord "worth it" I would gladly lay my money down for that chance.
I personally don't feel obligated. I mean for someone who just wants to play an awesome board game on the weekends every blue moon, the Warlord would seem very fun, and would be just fine, but for someone like myself who been playing competitive card games for a while, I analyze, and calculate, playtest, then analyze and calculate some more, and the difference becomes a lot clearer as to what is "good" and what is not "viable". I believe those are relative terms in regards to the player. It only really matters if you plan on being competitive, but on the other hand, everyone wants to win.
Since MW has more of an LCG feel to it than just a weekend board game, I would say that buying an expansion is just a given for making the game better, and not a mandatory purchase. I don't plan on BEING competitive, but at the same time I want to PLAY competitive because I play a lot, and I also want to win.
Win or lose, I'm always going to want to see what new ideas, and strategies the AW team has in store for all us would-be know-it-all CCG players. I'm sure it will be worth every penny.
I agree with most of this. Something to add I think is that it really just depends on how much you like the Warlord and the Warlock.
Godspeed gentlemen.
...and ladies and people of all genders and those who don't have a gender? Also, for some reason I thought only people involved with the United States Air Force say "Godspeed", and only when they're about to send someone on a dangerous mission. That might be just because of the Science Fiction I've watched, though...
-
Nobody has trademarked the term Godspeed. Anybody may use it. I doubt he meant to leave anybody out with the term gentlemen either. The English language hasn't really caught up to the Times yet and there isn't quite an equivalent term for including everybody. I think we are getting off topic though.
-
Nobody has trademarked the term Godspeed. Anybody may use it. I doubt he meant to leave anybody out with the term gentlemen either. The English language hasn't really caught up to the Times yet and there isn't quite an equivalent term for including everybody. I think we are getting off topic though.
Godspeed everybody! (Zuberi thought there were not sufficient unisex/agendered/gender neutral pronouns, but I just proved them wrong. In fact, singular they has been in use for hundreds of years, and it's only relatively recently in history that a bunch of sexist grammar nazis banned its use.)
Wow. Opinions really ARE like teleports.
1. Wizards are OP
2. Arcane Wonders is doing their best to make the Wizard not OP
3. Sylex expressed his appreciation of that by telling them "Godspeed Gentlemen".
4. Sexism/political correctness/ grammar.
I would say in the past few posts, we've moved once on topic and then warped about 3 zones off topic. That's 9 mana.
-
Well the topic was supposed to be my opinions as well as everyone else's, and to that extent, we haven't been OFF topic very often.
Also Godspeed gentlemen was pretty much a figure of speech towards the developers in hopes of a speedy and successful release.
In Air Force terms, I hope that mission is successful. I certainly wasn't trying to be sexist or negative toward any certain demographic, although I may sometimes forget that I'm speaking to a broader audience here than I'm used to so if I offended anyone, it wasn't my intention to do so.
That being said, if political correctness is what you seek, then my posts probably aren't the ones to follow.
-
Well the topic was supposed to be my opinions as well as everyone else's, and to that extent, we haven't been OFF topic very often.
Also Godspeed gentlemen was pretty much a figure of speech towards the developers in hopes of a speedy and successful release.
In Air Force terms, I hope that mission is successful. I certainly wasn't trying to be sexist or negative toward any certain demographic, although I may sometimes forget that I'm speaking to a broader audience here than I'm used to so if I offended anyone, it wasn't my intention to do so.
That being said, if political correctness is what you seek, then my posts probably aren't the ones to follow.
No worries, I wasn't offended, just mildly annoyed. When people are being unintentionally sexist without malice, it's like a hard to reach itch that just HAS to be scratched. It probably wouldn't bug me so much if I didn't encounter it ALL THE TIME. Imagine if everyone around you started believing the sky was teal or turquoise, even though the daytime sky is obviously blue and not green. Even if it doesn't really matter, you'd probably have the strong urge to correct people about the color of the sky too.
-
"Everybody" doesn't have the same polite courtesy that gentlemen or lady does. It is the broad equivalent of guys and gals, really. I maintain that English does not have an all inclusive word with the same connotations :P lol
-
Godspeed everyone. To all the people of these forums, Godspeed.
Better?
And don't forget I also used singular they which can be either formal or informal.
-
Godspeed everyone. To all the people of these forums, Godspeed.
I am Sylex, and I approve this message ;)
-
Well the topic was supposed to be my opinions as well as everyone else's, and to that extent, we haven't been OFF topic very often.
Also Godspeed gentlemen was pretty much a figure of speech towards the developers in hopes of a speedy and successful release.
In Air Force terms, I hope that mission is successful. I certainly wasn't trying to be sexist or negative toward any certain demographic, although I may sometimes forget that I'm speaking to a broader audience here than I'm used to so if I offended anyone, it wasn't my intention to do so.
That being said, if political correctness is what you seek, then my posts probably aren't the ones to follow.
No worries, I wasn't offended, just mildly annoyed. When people are being unintentionally sexist without malice, it's like a hard to reach itch that just HAS to be scratched. It probably wouldn't bug me so much if I didn't encounter it ALL THE TIME. Imagine if everyone around you started believing the sky was teal or turquoise, even though the daytime sky is obviously blue and not green. Even if it doesn't really matter, you'd probably have the strong urge to correct people about the color of the sky too.
How do you know it is not you whos wrong believing it is blue? ;)
-
Colors are subjective. Especially since different people are able to detect different colors. Most women physically have more receptors in their eyes allowing them to distinguish more different shades and colors than men. Most people can only discern around 5 distinct colors in a natural rainbow, while some can describe 10+
The sky doesn't necessarily look the same to everyone.
-
Interesting colour perception fact: a very small proportion of women have an extra type of colour receptor in the eye, enabling them to see a wider colour gamut than the rest of the population. Apparently developing a visual test for this was extremely difficult, never mind things like trying to communicate the differences in perception.
-
I refuse to comment on the color of the sky as I work nights, and don't go outside very often. Could be polk-a-dots for all I know.
If the sky was green, how would we know when to stop mowing the lawn?
Ya...........get THAT stirring around in the noodle.