Arcane Wonders Forum
Mage Wars => General Discussion => Topic started by: Sailor Vulcan on January 06, 2018, 07:14:06 PM
-
So, obviously mage wars isnt actually disappearing any time soon. It seems that very recently in the past month or so a lot of old retired online mage warriors have come crawling out of the woodwork and returned to the game after a long period of inactivity. When I said that the forums had become a ghost town, a week later it was no longer a ghost town. That being said, we do seem to have difficulty growing our community, and Arcane Wonders isn't planning on selling the franchise anytime soon if ever.
The thing is, mage wars has SO MUCH potential for customization of strategies and variant formats and maps which is largely untapped right now. Domination is hardly played. Team play is hardly played. Academy perhaps is played a little more often than they are but probably not by much.
There are no publicly visible competitive metas for any variant maps or formats of mage wars, or at least not that I know of.
Let that sink in for a moment. The only format of mage wars with any serious competitive play after six years of the game's existence is just plain vanilla 1v1 3x4 zone no starting terrains Arena. And there is not enough interest to make any variant formats actually have competitive play any time soon.
This is a huge letdown for me. I love to play variant rulesets and design them for others to play, but it seems like my efforts on this front are largely wasted in the Mage Wars community. The long and short of the issue is, I suspect, that we simply dont have a large enough playerbase to support variant competitive play, and we never have.
My question is, is it possible to grow the playerbase to that point, if so how can it be accomplished, does Arcane Wonders have any plans to try to accomplish it, and if so what are those plans?
While mage wars is not dying, I do still feel like Arcane Wonders did kinda bungle their marketing for the game and impeded if not outright prevented much of the game's potential for future growth. Someone said recently in another thread that Pegasus Spiele, the german distributor for mage wars, is discontinuing their translation of the game. I think this is likely to indicate a big problem because a lot of our best players have come from germany. Over the years I've heard people online talk about mage wars like it was specifically a game for Americans and there is even less people playing it in europe or elsewhere.
Sometimes I feel really let down by this game which I love which I invested so much of my time and energy into. It is a great game, but it's greatness comes and goes, and it could have been amazing all the time instead of just sometimes great. It was so much better in 2013, when there were lots of people here, Arcane Wonders was still actually producing story material and in the process of making the first battlegrounds set, and a bunch of other mage wars things besides just pumping out new cards. The community wasnt just active, it was ALIVE.
And one of the worst things is that over time Arcane Wonders has mostly stopped communicating with its playerbase. We can talk about these problems all we want, but Arcane Wonders will not respond to tell us what they plan to do about it. They will just have their playtesters come on and say "trust me, next year will be amazing and there will be so much new awesome content etc etc etc."
We've heard this before. 2016 we were promised that 2017 would be an amazing year for mage wars. And yet for most of 2017 the online community was not very active, and the forums were a ghost town until sometime in december. Where was this amazing year for mage wars we were promised by the arcane wonders playtesters? Maybe it's in the same place as the other amazing years of mage wars we were promised before, which also didn't quite happen either?
Why isn't arcane wonders communicating with their playerbase more? I don't really see them on here at all anymore. In fact, I think responding to the "Mage wars is dead" thread was the only post they made on here for months and months if not the whole year. Somebody correct me if I'm wrong about that.
Even if I somehow do manage to create an actual local player community for this game at this point in the game's history, how big is it realistically likely to grow, and what am I supposed to tell them about all this?
-
I think that Mage Wars could potentially get up to 360,000 players in the USA and Canada and a total of 1.2 million players in the rest of the developed world (around 1:1,000). A Mage Wars video game could potentially reach 3.6 million player in the USA and Canada and a total of 12 million players in the rest of the developed world (around 1:100). I think that Arcane Wonders is leaving money on the ground by not marketing Mage Wars through developing a video game for the Nintendo Switch because the Nintendo Switch is popular among the population that Mage Wars wants to attract (it would also provide revenue to expand Arcane Wonders so that they could hire more permanent staff to allow them to bring out more expansions for Academy and Arena).
Imagine for a moment if the population of Mage Wars players was 1:1,000 for board games and 1:100 for video game. In a medium-sized city of 100,000, you would have 100 people playing the board game and 1,000 people playing the video game. In that scenario, you could probably have three games a day in person without difficulty and not play the same person more than once a month. That is how big I think that Mage Wars can grow if Arcane Wonders decides to market Mage Wars through making a video game for the Nintendo Switch (or a similar level of marketing).
-
I think that Mage Wars could potentially get up to 360,000 players in the USA and Canada and a total of 1.2 million players in the rest of the developed world (around 1:1,000). A Mage Wars video game could potentially reach 3.6 million player in the USA and Canada and a total of 12 million players in the rest of the developed world (around 1:100). I think that Arcane Wonders is leaving money on the ground by not marketing Mage Wars through developing a video game for the Nintendo Switch because the Nintendo Switch is popular among the population that Mage Wars wants to attract (it would also provide revenue to expand Arcane Wonders so that they could hire more permanent staff to allow them to bring out more expansions for Academy and Arena).
Imagine for a moment if the population of Mage Wars players was 1:1,000 for board games and 1:100 for video game. In a medium-sized city of 100,000, you would have 100 people playing the board game and 1,000 people playing the video game. In that scenario, you could probably have three games a day in person without difficulty and not play the same person more than once a month. That is how big I think that Mage Wars can grow if Arcane Wonders decides to market Mage Wars through making a video game for the Nintendo Switch (or a similar level of marketing).
Um, you do realize that Arcane Wonders is a small company right? I mean, making a game for Nintendo switch? Are you serious? They'd never get Nintendo to agree to that. Mage Wars would have to be a LOT more successful irl before anything like that could possibly happen. Remember that in the OP I asked for realistic solutions not wildly insanely idealistic ones. If mage wars was successful enough of a franchise to interest Nintendo in making a mage wars game, the problems described in the OP would have been long since solved.
Also where are you getting all these numbers from?
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-J327A using Tapatalk
-
Nintendo is the easiest console to make game for because it is free (https://developer.nintendo.com/faq). You or I (or anyone on the forums) could make and market an indie game for Nintendo without any difficulty (though they monitor games for copyright violations and inappropriate content). I really doubt that Mage Wars would cost more to make than Binding of Isaac.
As for the numbers, I am basing my numbers on the proportion of population based on my belief in the potential of Mage Wars, which I think would be four times more popular than Binding of Isaac as a video game. With the video game as marketing, the board game sales would pick up, and I think they would reach 10% of the video game sales. It is just my opinion though.
-
I really liked a version of mage wars for the PC (Steam) or game consoles (PS4) it would certainly also help the board game version to grow a lot.
If it was only for Nindento I would not like it because I will never buy something from Nindento again.
-
Using statistics from BoardgameGeek.com we see that Mage Wars Arena has 11,000 registered BGG members who own the game. Almost, 1,200 of these consider themselves 'Fans' of the game or roughly 10%.
Compare this with BGG stats for Magic the Gathering that has been in the marketplace since 1993. It has 27,000 owners and 1,500 Fans or roughly 6%.
I think we have two very different business models for each of these games. One requires tournaments and buzz and multiple purchases by players to drive revenue while the other relies more on word of mouth and focused advertising that can be lost in the noise of promotional activities coming through many media channels, such as local game stores, online videos, and a 'professional tournament' circuit.
We shouldn't expect an easily identified player base at a 'tournament' level as you might find with MtG or Dicemasters since these use tournaments as part of their business model.
-
There's something you probably overlooked in that, which is that a large number of those fans of Mage Wars are probably people who used to be really into it but stopped playing after some point.
Also, this talk of having different distribution models implying that tournament play doesn't matter as much for promoting the game or that we shouldn't expect to have a visible competitive playerbase is obvious nonsense. We already do have a visible competitive playerbase, it's just tiny.
I would argue that Arcane Wonders DOES use tournaments as part of their business model, but because they are such a small company with such a small competitive player base and because of their marketing mistakes, these tournaments remain small and perhaps less effective at promoting the game than word of mouth.
What you said only demonstrates that MTG is a LOT more popular and well funded than mage wars. That isn't anything new.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-J327A using Tapatalk
-
It would be a good idea to have a version of Mage Wars for PC or console.
Many who do not know the game would pay attention and invest in the real cards too.
That would make more people know what Mage Wars is for a Great Game.
But we know "AW" has even with Spellbookbuilder and the app problems.
They would need to show a Games Forge the idee of Mage Wars, the video game has great potential to become a hit, and both would provitir.
-
I agree that making a game out of the card game would be the best way. I do not think it should be tied to another "board-game" platform but instead a standalone game in the steam market.
To make sure a game like this would be successful you'd need it to be at least 100 times more polished than the version of MW on Octagon. MW works on Octagon because us players already know the game well and can correct mistakes that happen.
-
Let that sink in for a moment. The only format of mage wars with any serious competitive play after six years of the game's existence is just plain vanilla 1v1 3x4 zone no starting terrains Arena. And there is not enough interest to make any variant formats actually have competitive play any time soon.
This is a huge letdown for me. I love to play variant rulesets and design them for others to play, but it seems like my efforts on this front are largely wasted in the Mage Wars community. The long and short of the issue is, I suspect, that we simply dont have a large enough playerbase to support variant competitive play, and we never have.
My question is, is it possible to grow the playerbase to that point, if so how can it be accomplished, does Arcane Wonders have any plans to try to accomplish it, and if so what are those plans?
I have the opposite position and vision to you - I hate variants, and in my opinion releasing multiple variants of the game as actively fragmented the playerbase and made multiple smaller metas, rather than increasing anything. Domination is a fine game, and so is Arena - but only one should have been released in my view.
Certainly I wouldn't want to see anything done to promote more variation in the game in this manner.
But in answer to your title question - the playerbase is pretty close to it's maximum size I think. The game has been around for 8 years, various modes of play have been issued, a moderate number of expansions and mages are out there, it's had release hype around a few products, it's a bigger OP scene than it currently does, and so on. Given the constraints that AW is the size company it is, marketing costs what it does, and more importantly than all of this - there are the number and quality of competitor games out there that there are, some with huge budgets and release programs, others with hugely topical IP's - MW is pretty much as big as it's going to be.
If new players coming in is enough to offset old players leaving, then that would be great, and call it a win!
-
I really really wish AW would share the rights to Mage Wars with another bigger company if not just sell it outright. They've bungled their marketing of the game, they barely communicate with the player base anymore, they can't afford to run balanced competitive play for Arena because it requires more time and tablespace than they can afford so they instead decide to break their own game by trying to squeeze it into a universal 1.25 hour time limit for all competitive matches, they've stopped making story material, they've stopped doing anything except pumping out new sets and holding their broken tourneys in conventions, their non American distributors are dropping them...
I honestly do not understand why they don't sell the game to a bigger company. They'd probably make more money in the long run if they did. The only reasonable explanation I can think of for this is that they are sucummbing to sunk-cost fallacy, even after I specifically warned them about sunk-cost fallacy. If I am wrong, they are welcome to correct me and explain what their actual reasoning is.
The game is not dying, but it is suffering, and I honestly do not understand why they don't seem to be doing anything to fix things.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-J327A using Tapatalk
-
Ok sailor. You gotta stop dude. Please stop taking to our forum, provided by AW, for us to discuss out favorite game, and take what seems like a monthly shit on the damn company. You've told us they should sell it, change its medium, reevaluate it from the ground up. You use phrases like bungled, indicating that if YOU were at the helm these silly little drawbacks wouldn't be happening on your watch! AW is like 3 people. Please let them run the game the way they see fit. Stop chicken littleing here every other month saying the sky is falling. Posts like this one are fine once in a blue moon ir if there is an actual problem to be figured out. But these doom amd gloom messages twice a month are gonna actually curtail folks who might visit these forums from joining us in our favorite game.
I very much get that you are passionate about this. But come on sailor quit shaking the damn "the game is over/ sucks/is failing monkey tree please? If only so i dont have to come reassure you and everybody that the game is fine just be patient?
End rant
-
@Romeoxero
Do you have any real contrary evidence to any specific thing I've said? If you're going to accuse me of exaggerating then at least point out specifically what I've said that is inaccurate instead of just criticizing my tone.
-
Alright, I'm going to take this in a bit of a different direction. In regards to the play base, does anyone know how many people actually play Mage Wars? It doesn't seem like it's going anywhere anytime soon since they are planning on expansions for 2018 (yay!) and the friends I've introduced it to really enjoy it.
I know card games always get compared to MTG, but CCGs have never been my thing since I like having money in my bank account, but what's a realistic size to say the game is currently at?
-
Alright, I'm going to take this in a bit of a different direction. In regards to the play base, does anyone know how many people actually play Mage Wars? It doesn't seem like it's going anywhere anytime soon since they are planning on expansions for 2018 (yay!) and the friends I've introduced it to really enjoy it.
I know card games always get compared to MTG, but CCGs have never been my thing since I like having money in my bank account, but what's a realistic size to say the game is currently at?
Turns out I was wrong about pretty much everything I said. Mage Wars isn't suffering or anything, it's just not as big as ccgs. There are some good points in this thread, but for the most part you can probably disregard it. If you want to hear the evidence that convinced me of this send me a pm, since I don't want to take up forum space with more endless debate about it.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-J327A using Tapatalk
-
I don't want to take up forum space with more endless debate about it.
I don't agree with you on some points (how could I agree with somebody loving academy? ;D ;D ;D), but I think the forum is here for endless debate too, every one is free to join the thread or not.
-
I think you all over analysis the situation.
The crowd isn't as big simply because the game isn't fun enough. Period.
We all in here loves it, but we have to realize it has turned out into a niche game for just a few people. The game have had its golden age already, with nice buzz and good marketing. It just didn't fly in the end.
Yes, the game is here to stay. But not for the big audience.
If this is ever going to occur the game needs a remake of some sort. As it is now original flaws and beginner mistakes in the design are carried from expansion to expansion that AW has to design around every time (most likely why the expansion gets less and less frequent, just because it is hard to take everything into account). The format and game needs to change to attract more people. If not, the player base will stay as it is.
-
I think you all over analysis the situation.
The crowd isn't as big simply because the game isn't fun enough. Period.
We all in here loves it, but we have to realize it has turned out into a niche game for just a few people. The game have had its golden age already, with nice buzz and good marketing. It just didn't fly in the end.
Yes, the game is here to stay. But not for the big audience.
If this is ever going to occur the game needs a remake of some sort. As it is now original flaws and beginner mistakes in the design are carried from expansion to expansion that AW has to design around every time (most likely why the expansion gets less and less frequent, just because it is hard to take everything into account). The format and game needs to change to attract more people. If not, the player base will stay as it is.
Absolutely +1!
From the tools of trade thread:
The target line for gear up is mage, not friendly mage. So if you suspect you have a nullify on you, you can cast gear up on the enemy mage and then put up to 3 equipment cards on to your mage.
- Coshade
Things like this and cards like altar of infernia makes the game completely unplayable and repellent to new players.
I guess the game and it's playerbase will stay as it is for a while. In real life surrounding me it is dead. Worldwide nerds on octgn still play it and even come back to play it. But more new players ... I don't think that's gonna happen without massiv
- errata
- streamlining
- marketing
- new arena releases
- simple new cards (not more new complex mechanics)
... and I don't see that coming to be honest.
EDIT 2 (oh no my first Edit got lost :( )
Looking at what I wrote above, there are things we as players could do. Obviously the first thing is showing the game to more players.
But what would really help is an unofficial, well thought through supplement with erratas. Arcane duels is kind of doing that with their own rules at ADMW 2. But it should go even deeper to take out all rules exploits (double dragon wtf) and answer ALL questions. For example more detailed steps of what can be revealed when should answer every timing issue and so on. There are many things to cover.
All in all that would be much to read (too much for beginners for sure) BUT it would bring the game back to its initial idea that IT SHOULD FEEL INTUITIV TO PLAY AND SHOULD BEHAVE AD YOU WOULD THINK IT SHOULD BEHAVE. And THAT is easy and fun to teach.
-> if the game can be won (or played fluid) by cards, not by rules, people would much more stick to it.
-
How does Altar of Ifernia make the game repellent to new players?
-
I don't agree with it, but I would think because it nerfs a lot of buffs you have set-up and planned for your mage or its creatures. It's one card that takes away about 30 different options.
-
How does Altar of Ifernia make the game repellent to new players?
Because this how a thread here looks like (in my eyes this is the definition of a catastrophe!):
Lost Grimoire volume 1 brings us this beauty from the school of darkness:
Altar of Infernia
Quick; 0-1; Zone
7 mana; Conjuration - Artifact; Lvl 2 Dark
2 Armor; 6 Health
Zone Exclusive; Epic
All creatures lose, and cannot gain, Melee +X traits. This does not affect Melee -X traits.
Sounds straightforward, right?
...
Or is it?
It turns out, when you look more closely (e.g. see the Codex), Mage Wars deals with adding attack dice in a variety of ways. Sometimes, the cards themselves or the rules and Codex as written state that a creature or creature type or damage type or mage gains "Melee +X", but other times it might say to "roll extra dice" instead. Depending on the wording, it may or may not be affected by Altar of Infernia. In general, you need to see if the trait keyword "Melee +X" is used in the effect of the ability or spell or condition marker, etc.
Here is a list of spells and abilities that are affected by Altar of Infernia, followed by a list that are not affected. Please feel free to post spells and abilities I've missed that you think are interesting.
Alter of Infernia affects:
- buffs that directly add Melee +X (typical examples include [mwcard=MW1E01]Bear Strength[/mwcard], Wolf Fury, Giant Size, [mwcard=MW1Q11]Gauntlets of Strength[/mwcard], Paladin's Valor, Blessed Focus, Knight's Courage, [mwcard=FWI06]Power Strike[/mwcard], [mwcard=MW1I03]Call of the Wild[/mwcard], etc)
- Growth markers (give Melee +1 for each Growth marker; thus [mwcard=DNC06]Kralathor, The Devourer[/mwcard], [mwcard=DNC11]Ravenous Ghoul[/mwcard], [mwcard=DNC12]Shaggoth-Zora[/mwcard] won't benefit as much with Infernia in play; each Growth marker still gives Innate Life +3 though)
- Rage +X (similar to Growth; thus [mwcard=MW1C25]Mountain Gorilla[/mwcard] is affected)
- Ehren, Enduring Paladin
- [mwcard=MW1C39]Valshalla, Lightning Angel[/mwcard]
- Steelclaw Matriarch
- [mwcard=MW1C29]Redclaw, Alpha Male[/mwcard] doesn't buff other canines (aside from Armor +1)
- Wychwood Hounds don't buff each other (aside from Armor +1)
- Knight of the Red Helm usually gets Melee +2 when attacking strongest creature
- Azurean Genie (a "wish" can still be used for Healing 2 or Stagger)
- [mwcard=MW1J08]Hand of Bim-Shalla[/mwcard] (similar to the Genie)
- [mwcard=MW1J20]Sacrificial Altar[/mwcard] (although a creature still gets the Piercing bonus and there is mana refunded)
- [mwcard=MW1J02]Animal Kinship[/mwcard] + canine(s)
- [mwcard=MW1Q30]Staff of Beasts[/mwcard] won't give a melee bonus to a friendly animal (but can still be used for healing)
- "Battle Skill" Mage ability (e.g. Straywood Beastmaster, Arraxian Crown Warlock, Bloodwave Warlord)
- Straywood Beastmaster's "Pet" (no general Melee +1 nor additional Melee +1 when in-zone)
- Bloodwave Warlord's "Veterans" AND command order "On Guard!" (although doesn't affect "Release Volley!" = Ranged +1, or "To Battle!" = Charge +1)
- Malakai Priest's "Holy Avenger" (no Melee +2 for you!)
- Johktari Beastmaster's "Wounded Prey" (no Melee +1 against that creature)
- "Siren's Call" ability wouldn't give a friendly creature Melee +2
- Paladin's "Vengeful Aura" doesn't give Melee +1, but still gives Piercing +2 so might still be worthwhile against heavily armored (but not Resilient) targets
- Aquatic creatures in Shallow Sea don't get Melee +1 (but non-aquatic non-flying still rolls 1 less die as normal...)
- [mwcard=MW1J06]Gate to Hell[/mwcard] wouldn't give Melee +1 buffs to demons
- [mwcard=MWSTX2FFQ02]Bloodfire Helmet[/mwcard] wouldn't give Melee +1 buffs to demons
- Demonic Link wouldn't give Melee +1 buff to the demon
- Drakas, Imp Overlord wouldn't give Melee +1 buffs to demons
- Similarly, Unholy Blood Ritual is a bad idea with Altar of Infernia in play!
- Kharne, Horned Demon normally gets Melee +X where X is the number of enemy creatures in its zone. Well, not with this Altar in play!
- [mwcard=MWSTX2FFC13]Wildfire Imp[/mwcard] wouldn't get Melee +2 for attacking an object with a Burn marker
- Wreck of the Viridian Lace would still grant Ranged +1 but not Melee +1 to pirates
- Temple of Meraveran becomes quite useless in Infernia!
- Shoalsdeep Tidecaller drops his Melee +2 bonus in Infernia, but still gets +4 to the effect die in initiative rounds
- Temple High Guard counterstrikes first but doesn't get Melee +2 when Guarding
- Metatron doesn't get bonuses for Temples in play
- Eligor Larington doesn't get a Melee +2 bonus (but does still gain Piercing +1) when counterstriking
- Alandell, the Blue Knight isn't worth putting mana into unless you REALLY need that Daze effect to trigger
- [mwcard=DNC01]Acolyte of the Bog Queen[/mwcard] can't give Melee +1 to zombies (but still reconstructs Skeletons and does Cleric stuff)
- [mwcard=MWBG1E03]Sentinel of V'Tar[/mwcard] wouldn't get Melee +1 when guarding, but would still get all the other bonuses
- [mwcard=FWE09]Standard Bearer[/mwcard] wouldn't give Melee +1 but would still grant Armor +1 to other friendly creatures
- [mwcard=MW1Q27]Dawnbreaker Ring[/mwcard] would only grant Ranged +1
- [mwcard=MW1Q17]Lightning Ring[/mwcard] would only grant Ranged +1 (...)
- [mwcard=DNQ03]Deathshroud Staff[/mwcard] wouldn't buff undead creatures with Melee +1
- [mwcard=MWSTX2FFI04]Flank Attack[/mwcard] would only grant Piercing +2
But has no effect on:
- Ranged +X (obviously)
- Piercing +X (making it a good alternative against armoured foes when Altar of Infernia is in play)
- Charge +X (!)
- Bloodthirsty +X (!!) <- think zombies, sharks, some demons, [mwcard=MW1C17] Goran, Werewolf Pet[/mwcard], etc
- most melee weapon Equipment's melee attacks (e.g. Arena melee weapons usually roll 4 dice + effects/traits/abilities, rather than having a Melee +X trait, so this is a way to mitigate against Infernia; and Academy melee weapons still roll one more die for Arena-level Mages as usual despite Infernia)
- Arraxian Crown Warlock's "Blood Reaper" (since it gains Bloodthirsty +2, not Melee +2)
- Necromancer's "Eternal Servant" (Piercing +1)
- Adramelech Warlock's "Smoldering Curses" ability (since enemy creatures gain Flame +1)
- Similarly, Malakai's Basilica works as normal (since it gives an enemy creature Light +1)
- Interestingly, unlike the "Wounded Prey" ability, [mwcard=MW1E27]Marked for Death[/mwcard] doesn't have anything to do with Melee +X, but rather specifies that enemy creatures each roll one more die when attacking
- Gloranna, Avenging Angel rolls an extra die for each Holy creature in its controller's discard pile (up to a cap)... which isn't technically getting Melee +X!
- Lightning Raptor still charges up as normal (changes the number of dice of the attack directly, not Melee +X)
- Afflicted Demon works as normal; e.g. the Weak tokens are both a bane and a boon as usual
- Ballad of Courage (Charge +2, Fast and can't be Hindered)
- Smite (rolls "2 additional attack dice," not Melee +2)
- [mwcard=DNI06]Zombie Frenzy[/mwcard] is unaffected... as are pretty much all other zombie-related bonuses (aside from Deathshroud Staff)
** I didn't mention it above, but "+X vs. ___" traits will still work as normal (e.g. [mwcard=MW1C36]Tarok, the Skyhunter[/mwcard]'s "+2 vs. Flying", [mwcard=MW1C31]Samandriel, Angel of Light[/mwcard]'s "+1 vs Nonliving or Dark", Joseph Trublood's "+2 vs Nonliving and Dark", [mwcard=DNC06]Kralathor, The Devourer[/mwcard]'s "+2 vs Undead", Titanodon's and Mountain Ram's "+2 vs Corporeal Conjurations", etc)
-
This is a very good card, a very good control card imo. However to use the words of the group at large any aggressive opponent will wreck this card. There are plenty of cards which deal with this card very easily.
The main questions are this, is it every book? So honestly is it really any more of a threat than any other?
Sure it turns off Melee buffs, but honestly it will just direct play until it can be removed. This game is a game of problems and solutions, it is about using the spellbook points you have to make the best book for your favourite mage. Any player worth their salt will either take Altar of Ifernia on the chin and play around it or obliterate it with the hatred it deserves, once it is in play.
So I reiterate my question why is this such a problem, and let me answer that too; it is not. You expect these kinds of play during book building and plan accordingly. "I want to do A, I use B and C cards to accomplish this. D and E Mages/cards give these roads to victory problems, do I chalk these up as bad match ups, or can I use F and G cards to counter these problems?" F and G can be Acid Ball, rust, dissolve, the list goes on.
It is also a well known fact in Customisable games that a pool of players will usually have a (group of) best player(s), that(/those) player(s) will win more games than others using a range of books/decks, usually from the tier 1 pool. Players within the group with them will either stay at the same level of play or get better as they strive to beat the best player(s), competition breeds competitive play at all levels; this ranges from causal to tournament level. This is the same with the new players, it is very rarely that they leave said group due to always losing, but normally they fit right in because it is not just about the game, but the people and the experiences made.
If anything this is a weaker example than the swarm hate that is in nearly every book. However this does not drive people from the game, just they adapt.
-
I think you completely missed the point that bigfatchef was making.
The fact that the interpretation of the card text takes up that much space and has a complicated interaction with a significantly large number of different ways to get the same effective buff is a rules problem. Yes, it can be learned, yes it can be dealt with, but picture a beginner that wants to use this card.
The beginner most likely thinks that all things that give your creature extra dice on a melee attack are melee buffs or conversely thinks that ONLY "Melee +X" should be affected by the altar and therefore it is garbage. NEITHER of these face value interpretations is correct. That, my friend, is the very definition of BAD design if you want to grow a player base. The simple fact that there are almost a hundred different conditions that each interact in various and sometimes non-intuitive ways are complete turn offs to the game.
Two case studies: How many people actually know what Trample does or the complete set of rules caveats for Tsunami?
-
It was that way when I lived with steelclawgrizzly, we kept getting better because we were playing each other a few times every week. When we introduced new people to the game, they kept getting better because they played against us and each other until they could beat us. It was always a moving experience when they got their first victory against either of our major books because they had finally reached our level. We had a good six people, other than us, who could beat us at least 1 out of every 3 times, which forced us to get even better because we did not like losing.
-
Oh no I got the point, I simply ignored it as it is not a real problem in my eyes. Mainly because of how successful Magic the Gathering (MTG), Hearthstone, Shadowverse, and others are. All with shifting game states, metas, and card pools.
Why is this not a problem?
Lets look at MTG. It has been around for 25 years and has 19,989 cards (as of 1/14/2018), lets call it 20k cards, and is roughly split evenly across the five colours. The new players each year stretch into atleast 10k, if not 100k. Some years get 1 million. One of the most played formats in MTG is Commander or EDH (if you are an older player like me). Popular enough to get its own dedicated set every year since 2009, two sets last year. This makes use of all 20k cards for the card pool and allows a single copy of each in a 100 card deck, with a banned list for the most broken cards. New players buy constructed decks to start with and as long as they are taught correctly in the first place there is no need to memorise all 20k cards, or the near infinite card interactions between them, because they have a good time. Also most of the older cards never see play due to rarity and scarcity. If anything it is the difference in meta pockets for different regions that make it what it is.
If anything you are assuming the knowledge that a new player has. If we ensure that they have the correct knowledge to start with, easy to access and understand card ruling FAQs, and answer questions they go about different things then they will be fine. New players are not as fragile as you think. From here they enter the game on more or less the same level as everyone did. From here it is what I said about before and Obsidian echoed. My own example is I had never played against a Druid at one point. My first game against a Druid was tough and I lost. Did I quit? No. I did however then go away and learn everything I could about a Druid, so that I didn't lose in the same ways against it. I am not alone in this sort of thing.
-
MTG does not have 20 different ways to gain 1 damage on an attack. All of its keywords are concisely explained and everything boils down to + or - on the damage/life. Each card is completely self sufficient in how it interacts with all other cards. The most complicated rules difference is Exile vs Destroy. That's it...and that's not even very hard.
Contrast that with mage wars. Just "healing" alone you have:
Regenerate
Remove Damage
Heal
Reconstruct
Lifebond
Finite Life
Life Gain
All of these have intertwined interaction. You cannot seriously look me in the eye and say that MTG is as convoluted as this. The body of rules that governs Mage Wars is far less elegant. It was supposed to overcome all of its debilitating hairsplitting rules by making all of them intuitive. I'm sad to say "intuitive" is not the word I would use for Mage Wars anymore.
-
MTG possesses around 1,000 different ways of dealing infinite amounts of damage when you are not using restricted card format.
-
MTG possesses around 1,000 different ways of dealing infinite amounts of damage when you are not using restricted card format.
A'ight, I'm done. We're talking past each other about I don't even know what anymore. Suffice it to say, I'm in agreement with bigfatchef.
-
MTG does not have 20 different ways to gain 1 damage on an attack. All of its keywords are concisely explained and everything boils down to + or - on the damage/life. Each card is completely self sufficient in how it interacts with all other cards. The most complicated rules difference is Exile vs Destroy. That's it...and that's not even very hard.
Contrast that with mage wars. Just "healing" alone you have:
Regenerate
Remove Damage
Heal
Reconstruct
Lifebond
Finite Life
Life Gain
All of these have intertwined interaction. You cannot seriously look me in the eye and say that MTG is as convoluted as this. The body of rules that governs Mage Wars is far less elegant. It was supposed to overcome all of its debilitating hairsplitting rules by making all of them intuitive. I'm sad to say "intuitive" is not the word I would use for Mage Wars anymore.
actually it does have a million ways to put +1/+1
the thing is , mage wars because it has another dimension, it tries to add many flavor mechanics,and all those above feel different, and they actually are, you can heal a skeleton,you reconstruct it.
also on the altar topic,maybe i dont get something? it just nullifies melee + dice. no other bonus dice
-
actually it does have a million ways to put +1/+1
My point is that all of the ways to give +1/+1 are functionally the exact same. Any of the million +1/+1 counters can be removed by any of the million ways to remove +1/+1 counters...they all interact seamlessly.
Charge +1, Bloodthisty+1, Melee +1, Flame +1 all give +1 die, but under certain circumstances AND the cards that remove "+1" die do not all work against them.
"Roll an additional die" is different than "gain [trait] +1" and interacts differently within the rules. For instance Battlefury lets you attack again without your "Melee +X", but you can still use your "Roll an additional die".
This is the problem with Mage Wars: an extra die should be an extra die and should also be...an extra die. It's not.
-
How does Altar of Ifernia make the game repellent to new players?
Because this how a thread here looks like (in my eyes this is the definition of a catastrophe!):
Lost Grimoire volume 1 brings us this beauty from the school of darkness:
Altar of Infernia
Quick; 0-1; Zone
7 mana; Conjuration - Artifact; Lvl 2 Dark
2 Armor; 6 Health
Zone Exclusive; Epic
All creatures lose, and cannot gain, Melee +X traits. This does not affect Melee -X traits.
Sounds straightforward, right?
...
Or is it?
It turns out, when you look more closely (e.g. see the Codex), Mage Wars deals with adding attack dice in a variety of ways. Sometimes, the cards themselves or the rules and Codex as written state that a creature or creature type or damage type or mage gains "Melee +X", but other times it might say to "roll extra dice" instead. Depending on the wording, it may or may not be affected by Altar of Infernia. In general, you need to see if the trait keyword "Melee +X" is used in the effect of the ability or spell or condition marker, etc.
Here is a list of spells and abilities that are affected by Altar of Infernia, followed by a list that are not affected. Please feel free to post spells and abilities I've missed that you think are interesting.
Alter of Infernia affects:
- buffs that directly add Melee +X (typical examples include [mwcard=MW1E01]Bear Strength[/mwcard], Wolf Fury, Giant Size, [mwcard=MW1Q11]Gauntlets of Strength[/mwcard], Paladin's Valor, Blessed Focus, Knight's Courage, [mwcard=FWI06]Power Strike[/mwcard], [mwcard=MW1I03]Call of the Wild[/mwcard], etc)
- Growth markers (give Melee +1 for each Growth marker; thus [mwcard=DNC06]Kralathor, The Devourer[/mwcard], [mwcard=DNC11]Ravenous Ghoul[/mwcard], [mwcard=DNC12]Shaggoth-Zora[/mwcard] won't benefit as much with Infernia in play; each Growth marker still gives Innate Life +3 though)
- Rage +X (similar to Growth; thus [mwcard=MW1C25]Mountain Gorilla[/mwcard] is affected)
- Ehren, Enduring Paladin
- [mwcard=MW1C39]Valshalla, Lightning Angel[/mwcard]
- Steelclaw Matriarch
- [mwcard=MW1C29]Redclaw, Alpha Male[/mwcard] doesn't buff other canines (aside from Armor +1)
- Wychwood Hounds don't buff each other (aside from Armor +1)
- Knight of the Red Helm usually gets Melee +2 when attacking strongest creature
- Azurean Genie (a "wish" can still be used for Healing 2 or Stagger)
- [mwcard=MW1J08]Hand of Bim-Shalla[/mwcard] (similar to the Genie)
- [mwcard=MW1J20]Sacrificial Altar[/mwcard] (although a creature still gets the Piercing bonus and there is mana refunded)
- [mwcard=MW1J02]Animal Kinship[/mwcard] + canine(s)
- [mwcard=MW1Q30]Staff of Beasts[/mwcard] won't give a melee bonus to a friendly animal (but can still be used for healing)
- "Battle Skill" Mage ability (e.g. Straywood Beastmaster, Arraxian Crown Warlock, Bloodwave Warlord)
- Straywood Beastmaster's "Pet" (no general Melee +1 nor additional Melee +1 when in-zone)
- Bloodwave Warlord's "Veterans" AND command order "On Guard!" (although doesn't affect "Release Volley!" = Ranged +1, or "To Battle!" = Charge +1)
- Malakai Priest's "Holy Avenger" (no Melee +2 for you!)
- Johktari Beastmaster's "Wounded Prey" (no Melee +1 against that creature)
- "Siren's Call" ability wouldn't give a friendly creature Melee +2
- Paladin's "Vengeful Aura" doesn't give Melee +1, but still gives Piercing +2 so might still be worthwhile against heavily armored (but not Resilient) targets
- Aquatic creatures in Shallow Sea don't get Melee +1 (but non-aquatic non-flying still rolls 1 less die as normal...)
- [mwcard=MW1J06]Gate to Hell[/mwcard] wouldn't give Melee +1 buffs to demons
- [mwcard=MWSTX2FFQ02]Bloodfire Helmet[/mwcard] wouldn't give Melee +1 buffs to demons
- Demonic Link wouldn't give Melee +1 buff to the demon
- Drakas, Imp Overlord wouldn't give Melee +1 buffs to demons
- Similarly, Unholy Blood Ritual is a bad idea with Altar of Infernia in play!
- Kharne, Horned Demon normally gets Melee +X where X is the number of enemy creatures in its zone. Well, not with this Altar in play!
- [mwcard=MWSTX2FFC13]Wildfire Imp[/mwcard] wouldn't get Melee +2 for attacking an object with a Burn marker
- Wreck of the Viridian Lace would still grant Ranged +1 but not Melee +1 to pirates
- Temple of Meraveran becomes quite useless in Infernia!
- Shoalsdeep Tidecaller drops his Melee +2 bonus in Infernia, but still gets +4 to the effect die in initiative rounds
- Temple High Guard counterstrikes first but doesn't get Melee +2 when Guarding
- Metatron doesn't get bonuses for Temples in play
- Eligor Larington doesn't get a Melee +2 bonus (but does still gain Piercing +1) when counterstriking
- Alandell, the Blue Knight isn't worth putting mana into unless you REALLY need that Daze effect to trigger
- [mwcard=DNC01]Acolyte of the Bog Queen[/mwcard] can't give Melee +1 to zombies (but still reconstructs Skeletons and does Cleric stuff)
- [mwcard=MWBG1E03]Sentinel of V'Tar[/mwcard] wouldn't get Melee +1 when guarding, but would still get all the other bonuses
- [mwcard=FWE09]Standard Bearer[/mwcard] wouldn't give Melee +1 but would still grant Armor +1 to other friendly creatures
- [mwcard=MW1Q27]Dawnbreaker Ring[/mwcard] would only grant Ranged +1
- [mwcard=MW1Q17]Lightning Ring[/mwcard] would only grant Ranged +1 (...)
- [mwcard=DNQ03]Deathshroud Staff[/mwcard] wouldn't buff undead creatures with Melee +1
- [mwcard=MWSTX2FFI04]Flank Attack[/mwcard] would only grant Piercing +2
But has no effect on:
- Ranged +X (obviously)
- Piercing +X (making it a good alternative against armoured foes when Altar of Infernia is in play)
- Charge +X (!)
- Bloodthirsty +X (!!) <- think zombies, sharks, some demons, [mwcard=MW1C17] Goran, Werewolf Pet[/mwcard], etc
- most melee weapon Equipment's melee attacks (e.g. Arena melee weapons usually roll 4 dice + effects/traits/abilities, rather than having a Melee +X trait, so this is a way to mitigate against Infernia; and Academy melee weapons still roll one more die for Arena-level Mages as usual despite Infernia)
- Arraxian Crown Warlock's "Blood Reaper" (since it gains Bloodthirsty +2, not Melee +2)
- Necromancer's "Eternal Servant" (Piercing +1)
- Adramelech Warlock's "Smoldering Curses" ability (since enemy creatures gain Flame +1)
- Similarly, Malakai's Basilica works as normal (since it gives an enemy creature Light +1)
- Interestingly, unlike the "Wounded Prey" ability, [mwcard=MW1E27]Marked for Death[/mwcard] doesn't have anything to do with Melee +X, but rather specifies that enemy creatures each roll one more die when attacking
- Gloranna, Avenging Angel rolls an extra die for each Holy creature in its controller's discard pile (up to a cap)... which isn't technically getting Melee +X!
- Lightning Raptor still charges up as normal (changes the number of dice of the attack directly, not Melee +X)
- Afflicted Demon works as normal; e.g. the Weak tokens are both a bane and a boon as usual
- Ballad of Courage (Charge +2, Fast and can't be Hindered)
- Smite (rolls "2 additional attack dice," not Melee +2)
- [mwcard=DNI06]Zombie Frenzy[/mwcard] is unaffected... as are pretty much all other zombie-related bonuses (aside from Deathshroud Staff)
** I didn't mention it above, but "+X vs. ___" traits will still work as normal (e.g. [mwcard=MW1C36]Tarok, the Skyhunter[/mwcard]'s "+2 vs. Flying", [mwcard=MW1C31]Samandriel, Angel of Light[/mwcard]'s "+1 vs Nonliving or Dark", Joseph Trublood's "+2 vs Nonliving and Dark", [mwcard=DNC06]Kralathor, The Devourer[/mwcard]'s "+2 vs Undead", Titanodon's and Mountain Ram's "+2 vs Corporeal Conjurations", etc)
There's a very simple solution to this that doesn't require any errata or massive overhauls. Just start using block formats for local tournaments. Considering that the wizard and his tower didn't get errata until after forged in fire came out, there is an enormous space of largely unexplored metagames using just the first five arena sets. Since most experienced players played the unbalanced wizard-dominated version of these metagames, they won't be as familiar with the many possible strategies that would have been viable back them if the wizard were balanced. Additionally, many of us were less skilled back then, and it would be interesting to see what new exciting strategies experienced players would come up with.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-J327A using Tapatalk
-
Puddn you find the words better than I do and talk from my heart.
+1 die, gain one die and roll one additional die should always be the same.
Beldin I am not talking about what the card does. My point is really, that m mage wars is unnecessary overcomplicated. Don't get me wrong here. I love the flavor of all the different traits. It's the tons of exceptions (now to find sometimes in many extra lines with extra rules for Academy) that makes the mess.
As I mention it already, Academy prevents core mechanics to be added to new cards where they thematically should be. So the theme starts feeling wrong also.
Sailor I don't get your point? What exactly do you mean with block format and how does a set of unwritten competition rules make the game more attractive for new players?
-
Puddn you find the words better than I do and talk from my heart.
+1 die, gain one die and roll one additional die should always be the same.
Beldin I am not talking about what the card does. My point is really, that m mage wars is unnecessary overcomplicated. Don't get me wrong here. I love the flavor of all the different traits. It's the tons of exceptions (now to find sometimes in many extra lines with extra rules for Academy) that makes the mess.
As I mention it already, Academy prevents core mechanics to be added to new cards where they thematically should be. So the theme starts feeling wrong also.
Sailor I don't get your point? What exactly do you mean with block format and how does a set of unwritten competition rules make the game more attractive for new players?
Some examples of possible block formats:
Core only
Core + FvW
Core + DvN
Core + Academy core + Academy Warlock and Priestess
Core + PvS
Core + FvW + CoK
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-J327A using Tapatalk
-
I do enjoy the game, but as a new player it can be a bit overwhelming at times. The concept is great and I want to keep playing it. What I find challenging is when I play a mage I haven't before, and suddenly all of these different tokens I've never seen come in to play. Suddenly there are Valor tokens, and Load tokens for the ballista, and now I'm grappled and pinned or something... it's kind a crazy.
Everyone I have played with has been very helpful in getting me through the rules. I never enjoyed the randomness of games like MTG (granted I only really played it in like 1996) but rule simplification could go a really long way.
-
It is really not that complicated, though I would like to have a central document for the combined rules, as things are a bit spread out. The key thing to remember is that Mage Wars is a board game that uses cards, not a card game that uses boards, and it is nothing compared to the complexity of a tabletop game like GURPS, Pathfinder, or Shadowrun. That being said, I think that is one of the reasons why a Mage Wars video game would be a good idea, as the video game could keep track of the complexity of the game.
-
Mage wars is the big game , with a small enterprise, Arcane wonders .
after read this post , il aggree with some people :
- This game must have more promotion because after the begin the last year , we haven't very great news for mage wars ( academie can be add some news card , but it s not magewars arena ) , after two years i will hope have good new from my favorite game !!!
- Arcane wonders is a small enterprise and he can' t working on mage wars extension or his promotion , and in same time working on their other game.
then when if we are not a project manager exclusive on mage wars we attempted to have only few news . but i am sure mage wars will had a great futur .
-
- Arcane wonders is a small enterprise and he can' t working on mage wars extension or his promotion , and in same time working on their other game.
:)
AW should stop all other games (including academy) and concentrate on Arena!
We would play a lot, they wouldn't eat a lot, and the best game ever would be!
-
For those of you who were wondering
what I meant by block formats and how that would help make the game more approachable for new players, here is a better explanation: http://forum.arcanewonders.com/index.php?topic=18588.0
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-J327A using Tapatalk
-
I disagree with block formats. One of the great features of Arena is that it is universal and, as long as I do not have any Promos, I can play in any tournament from Helsinki to Tokyo. Introducing black formats would fragment the already small population of Mage Wars players and would needless complicate tournaments.
-
I disagree with block formats. One of the great features of Arena is that it is universal and, as long as I do not have any Promos, I can play in any tournament from Helsinki to Tokyo. Introducing black formats would fragment the already small population of Mage Wars players and would needless complicate tournaments.
I have yet to see any evidence that the mage wars community has fragmented. Pretty much everyone still plays standard vanilla Arena as far as I can tell. It's just that now some people play other formats *in addition to that*. And if we want to make Arena approachable to newer players, realistically speaking, we probably can't do it without block formats.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-J327A using Tapatalk
-
I disagree with block formats. One of the great features of Arena is that it is universal and, as long as I do not have any Promos, I can play in any tournament from Helsinki to Tokyo. Introducing black formats would fragment the already small population of Mage Wars players and would needless complicate tournaments.
I have yet to see any evidence that the mage wars community has fragmented. Pretty much everyone still plays standard vanilla Arena as far as I can tell. It's just that now some people play other formats *in addition to that*. And if we want to make Arena approachable to newer players, realistically speaking, we probably can't do it without block formats.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-J327A using Tapatalk
I don't agree. The only block format - as you call it - that has a good reason to be played is “core only“. That is great for beginners and works fine. From the first expansion you add I see no reason why you should allow some and others not. Maybe saying “no promos“ and “no academy“ is kinda comprehensible.
-
Beginning players get overwhelmed by all the many many many different conditions and cards and rules. I'm not sure why you think that core only is the only block worth playing for new players.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-J327A using Tapatalk
-
Begining players have also a lot of cards to buy if they want to play with all the boxes!
-
And if we want to make Arena approachable to newer players, realistically speaking, we probably can't do it without block formats.
I disagree with this piece here. Block formats are just more things for people to memorize. If a relatively small cardpool causes them trouble, then knowing different formats and navigating which cards are legal in what tournament won't help either. Instead of using tournaments to grow the community, they should start by playing casually.
Teaching most new players in a casual environment makes sense most of the time. There are times you'll find a newer person ready to jump into the deepend, but you can restrict away to your hearts desire as you are teaching people. No need for any officially supported format. All you need is someone willing to teach the new person in incremental steps. Once they have the basic game down, let them expand the cardpool they want to use at their own pace. The core set alone is enough to still play games that aren't lopsided against the entire card pool, especially in the process of learning the fundamentals of the game. I'd also suggest keeping some of the weirder interactions to a minimum for the first few games, but at some point they'll have to learn the interesting interactions if there is any interest in a tournament setting.
-
And if we want to make Arena approachable to newer players, realistically speaking, we probably can't do it without block formats.
I disagree with this piece here. Block formats are just more things for people to memorize. If a relatively small cardpool causes them trouble, then knowing different formats and navigating which cards are legal in what tournament won't help either. Instead of using tournaments to grow the community, they should start by playing casually.
Teaching most new players in a casual environment makes sense most of the time. There are times you'll find a newer person ready to jump into the deepend, but you can restrict away to your hearts desire as you are teaching people. No need for any officially supported format. All you need is someone willing to teach the new person in incremental steps. Once they have the basic game down, let them expand the cardpool they want to use at their own pace. The core set alone is enough to still play games that aren't lopsided against the entire card pool, especially in the process of learning the fundamentals of the game. I'd also suggest keeping some of the weirder interactions to a minimum for the first few games, but at some point they'll have to learn the interesting interactions if there is any interest in a tournament setting.
That only works if there is someone to teach them. What about players who pick up the game offline without there already being a local mage wars community in their area? If anything I would recommend block formats for local tournaments for relatively new mage wars communities. Also, the particular blocks i recommended would likely be the easiest for transferring from Academy to Arena.
And even if there is someone to teach, there's still an in between state where a player is new enough to not be a total beginner but not experienced enough to jump to playing with all of the expansions. These people could benefit from tournament play without full card pools because that way they can improve their skills in tandem with their knowledge of the cards and rules increasing. This means less information overload for people who start out in academy.
Newer players won't have to figure out and memorize which cards are legal in which card pools. They can just pick one to try, and then when they feel ready they can move on to a different one with more sets.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-J327A using Tapatalk