Arcane Wonders Forum
Mage Wars => Spells => Topic started by: Alexander West on February 24, 2014, 12:54:26 AM
-
I am going to use a 5 point scale to classify spells in Mage Wars. Rather than try to rank them (which I think is not useful), I just want to score them as a thought exercise. I am leaving out most specific mage only spells, since those don't feel relevant to rate. Here is my scale:
5 - I almost always put one or more copies of this spell in my books regardless of school.
4 - I strongly consider putting this spell in my book regardless of school.
3 - I almost always put one or more copies of this spell in my book if its in my school, and rarely would splash it.
2 - I sometimes put this spell in my book if its in my school.
1 - I have trouble imagining using this spell, even if its in my school.
5s:
Teleport
Dispel
Dissolve
Eagleclaw Boots
4s:
Steelclaw Grizzly
Mana Crystal
Mana Flower
Battleforge
Dragonscale Hauberk
Veterans Belt
Regrowth Belt
Meditation Amulet
Regrowth
Rhino Hide
Harmonize
Cheetah Speed
Nullify
Sleep
Maim Wings
Acid Ball
Hurl Boulder
Heal
Minor Heal
Purify
Wand of Healing
Dispel Wand
Mage Wand
3s:
Leather Gloves (counts as being in everyone's book due to Novice)
(any armor granting equipment not listed elsewhere)
Dancing Scimitar
Suppression Robe
Lair
Gate to Voltari
Librum Mortus
Temple of Asyra
Archer's Watchtower
Grimson Deadeye
Sir Corazin, Blademaster
Goblin Slinger
Knight of Westlock
Royal Archer
Galador, Protector of Straywood
Karalathor, the Devourer
Wall of Thorns
Zombie Brute or Skeleton Warrior
Shaggoth-Zora or Mort
Undead Archer
Necropian Vampiress
Devouring Ooze
Gorgon Archer
Whirling Spirit
Iron Golem
Force Push
Force Wave
Precise Strike
Piercing Strike
Power Strike
Piercing Shot
Mind Control
Turn to Stone
Force Hold
Fortified Position
Sacred Ground
Enchantment Transfusion
Bear Strength
Bull Endurance
Eagle Wings
Mongoose Agility
Falcon Precision
Healing Charm
Block
Decoy
Purge Magic
Seeking Dispel
Ghoul Rot
Drain Life
Magebane
Poisoned Blood
Agony
Enfeeble
Idol of Pestilence
Deathlock
Suppression Orb
Mordok's Obelisk
Ring of Fire
Fireball
Fireblast
Chain Lightning
Jet Stream
Geyser
Zombie Frenzy or Reassemble
2s:
(any non-armor spell not listed elsewhere)
1s:
Stumble
Curious what other people think? Should some spells be rated higher? Lower? Are the categories useful? Have I described them well enough?
-
I rank Bears Strength, Cheetah Speed, and Rhino Hide as must haves but that's just me.
-
The list is definitely subjective, and as such there will be a lot of disagreement over different spells. I would personally change many of your spell rankings by as many as 2 ranks, but that's me. I am me and you are you, and this is how you would rank them. I do think the list could be useful for building spell books, but it is going to be a personal preference no matter how you cut it. The only benefit this list would have to other people is to get a glimpse into your mindset. Which is not a minor thing. Seeing how other people think and approach the game can give a person new insights that they might never have gotten on their own. For that, I thank you.
-
The scope is far too large
And the value of cards varies with the mages playing (cost-benefit), other cards in the book and your local meta
For example, AlexW, you posted Pushy Wizard hence Eagleclaw up there
Yet in my meta, Veteran's Belt + High Armour has nerfed Thorns Push and Wall Bash
Interesting though this discussion will be, it falls prey to the same assumptions fas723 made with "most efficient creatures"
The reality is you would need to map out a Kohonen Network of card interactions
Then apply it to a changing meta propensity to encounter opponent cards to evlaute this
For example, in a meta of Buffed Forcemasters, Curse Stacking and Buffed Elites, Purge Magic immediately becomes a valuable threat.
There are just so many dimensions that I think the thread's subject should be de-scoped to just one aspect
Broadly your 5 categories are:
(A) Always Golden (e.g. Teleport)
(B) Toolbox Golden (e.g. Purge Magic) - reacting to opponent's strategy
(C) Workhorse - the majority - just don't talk about these and cloud the issue
(D) Niche Strategy (e.g. Rajan's Fury) - useful only for certain own strategies
(E) Waste of Trees (e.g. Destroy Magic)
I think the most fun to be had is a thread dedicated to Category (E) = laminate as a coaster
And then others can defend why those crads deserve to be in Category (D) = niche strategy
For example, if they release cheap mobile Demons, Gate to Hell is borderline Niche Strategy
But spending 4+SPs on reactive opponent's build-reliant spell like full action Destroy Magic is never going to happen
Another example: you hate Stumble
But actually it's Niche suitable for at least these strategies
Teleport to Monster Pit + Transfusion Jinx Nullify Force Hold Stumble
(Could be played in-school with Forcemaster Force Pull into Teleport Trap into Pit of 4 Psyloks if only better)
It could also help Warlord Ranged Strategy against Melee Units (e.g. 6 Falcons + 4 Rajan's Fury BM Swarm)
Aniother edge case: playing against Golem Warlord with a Helm of Charge
The problem is the mandatory reveal which I so hate in this game
We have this awesome mechanic where we bank actions as enchantments with instant speed surprise reveals
And then they nerf the most enchanting aspect of the game with dumb down mandatory reveal
In the case of Stumble, there is only a tiny window before it has to be revealed
What is the point of an enchantment you can't bank for surprise reveal as moving is such a common action?
To add insult to injury, Force Hold is non-mandatory, provokes Dispel for cost 3 and only costs 1 more mana
So Stumble becomes an incredibly situational "poor man's Force Hold" for those who can't afford 4SPs
I think they put it in DvN because thematically it fits with Horror Movies etc (theme plays a very high priority)
When really they are never going to catch-up on their promo card backlog so might as well forget failures
You've got me ranting again! :)
But mandatory reveal so annoys me because its a great game needlessly shooting itself in the foot again.
Just imagine what a high skill finesse spell Stumble could have been if it was not a mandatory reveal...?
-
Stumble is not mandatory reveal.
*boom* (head explodes)
-
Stumble is not mandatory reveal.
*boom* (head explodes)
Your usual inimicable style, jack.
At work here, doesn't it say "the next time this creature would move2 in its text?
-
The Promo:
You may reveal Stumble when this creature is activated. It stumbles and may not take a move action during its action phase. Then, destroy Stumble. Has no effect on creatures with the Unmovable trait.
The DvsN:
When this creature is activated, you may reveal Stumble. If you do, the creature can't take a move action until the end of its Action Phase. Then, destroy Stumble. Has no effect on creatures with the Unmovable or Uncontainable trait.
-
How wrong I am - I must have misread it.
Serves me right for carrying forward my venting steam on Mandatory Reveal (another thread elsewhere).
Stumble is a pretty good trap then. A definite upgrade iin my eyes,
I wonder why AlexW put it lowest category (probably misread it like me).
His low ranking certainly assured me my false memory of it was correct.
Will have to giye it a try, seems perfect for some of my builds - thanks.
I'd hardly call it a "boom (head explodes)" moment, jacksmack
But then I've got used to your style which is certainly one of a kind on this forum :)
Thanks for the correct and the trouble you took typing both version texts
It certainly improved my MW and for that I am grateful
(The gloating public humiliation less so...)
-
I'd put stumble in rank three at worst, it's one of my favorite spells. It's cheap, it'll hold a creature or mage up for one turn (often a critical turn), it's not mandatory reveal (as others have pointed out), and while it's not as permanent as tanglevine, a tanglevine can theoretically be killed the turn it comes out. Unless the opposing mage happens to be holding a teleport, there's no way out of stumble. When I'm playing forcemaster I'll often use it to pull nullifies since it's only one book point and if the thing I was worried about wasn't a nullify, I still have a very useful card on the creature. I put at least two in every FM book I play and will include it in other books if movement control is important.
-
So folks, this unintentionally demonsrates what I said
I think the most fun to be had is a thread dedicated to Category (E) = laminate as a coaster
And then others can defend why those crads deserve to be in Category (D) = niche strategy
People should post what they think are stinker cards
And others can come to its defence and prove them wrong
The poster and those who agreed with him learn something
The rest of us are entertained
Now even as a mandatory, I thought Stumble was Niche
Now I know it's non-mandatory. I would rank it as Workhorse (rejected in most builds because of its 2SPs)
However my personal bete noir which I just can't understand how it ever passed Quality Control is...
4 Destroy Magiic? - er, no thanks (0 would have been a nice number until we get more zone/conjuration enchants)
Cards that rely on opponent's build are Toolbox
(Cards that rely on your own niche build are Strategic)
So here we have a Toolbox Level 4 Arcane FULL ACTION spell
Costs Wizard 4 and others 8 (let's not talk about the Warlord...)
What possible use has this spell got in the current meta (let alone when it appeared)?
Yes a Beastmaster may buff himself and his Grizzly with Bear Strength, Vampirism, Regowth, Rhino Hide
But you also lose own enchants which therefore requires positioning (full action) and not mixing own on targets
As for trap builds, they rely on Transfuison which can save the stack of cheaply cast hidden enchants anyway!
Surely the point about Toolbox cards which are based on opponent's build is you need them to be low SP cost
So that they get included in builds as "Golden Toolbox" for those what-if matches - and certainly not level 4
Spell level is surely an indication of that school's exclusivity?
If it's above level 2, it is almost "Trained Only" in our ever-growing bulging 120 budget books
A spell which fits with your strategy should have different levels to one based on a possible opposing build
Because your build is 100% certain so it's relevant - the opposing build is a % chance based on changing meta
I'm bringing this up specifically because I'm interested in the public view on this (being discussed elsewhere)
And because it's relevant to the categorisation of spells (Rise Again is level 3 but costs 2+0)
Anyone else willing to point the finger at a card that baffles them?
I'm not trying to be nasty but constructive as mistakes are simply opportunities to learn and not repeat.
-
I don't use destroy magic myself, but I could see it's usefulness in an equipment-dependent wizard build. Since it targets a zone instread of a creature it bypasses nullify enchantment stack protection.
And I think of rise again as costing 2 + X where X is the level of the creature (I think, I'm not at home). You just don't pay X until the creature dies. Essentially, rise again has the same cost as animate dead, but you pay 2 extra mana in order to bank the action.
-
Destroy magic can also bypass enchantment transfusion protection if all valid targets are in one zone together. Its not even very nitch since enchantments are in almost every book. The problem is its most useful in an enchantmentless book which is probably swarm/equipment based so mostly warlord and some Beastmasters.
How about stranglevine. When is it worth while to spend extra mana and so? Only if they are out of teleports...
-
Destroy Magic is useful the turn after your mage is Teleported and Enchantment Transfusioned - 16 mana is a lot but you just gained 4-6 actions. I imagine it would also be pretty good against a turtling Holy Mage.
One card I don't see mentioned much around here is Armor Ward. If you combine that with a Battle Forge your opponent is putting himself further and further behind every time he Dissolves something.
-
Both good points, webcatcher
DESTROY MAGIC
I'm not going to get into the ins and outs of Destroy Magic, full action range 0-1 like Firestorm etc.
The point I'm trying to make is this.
Spells which are reliant on opponent's build need to be cheap in levels
Else they won't be put into books on the off chance when there is so many others competing
The Opportunity Cost is simply too high just for an off-chance
I have nothing against the in-game cost
Purge Magic - 12 mana, range 1, quick spell (QC flexibility), can be Nullified
Destroy Magic - 16 mana, range 1, full action (mage stationary)
That seems imminently fair
What I have trouble is the spell points cost
4SP toolbox will never get into a book
Toolbox spells that rely on opponent's build have to be low level for game variety
I tell you what Destroy Magic should have been. Level 4 War with an exclamation mark.
It's just like a brainless Orc Barbarian to destroy magic and not care who controls it.
Then it stops being a sledgehammer Toolbox and becomes a Strategy piece for Warlord.
Opponents know they can't over commit to enchantments with this.
(16 mana is just 3-4 enchantments and you get action advantage)
This would also explain why Warlord is better off with Commands.
Who needs Dispels when you have a deterrent to avoid over-use?
RISE AGAIN
At Level 3 Dark Mage Only, this was obviously for the Warlock who can recast his only copy
I don't know what its interaction with Sectarus is but I'm hoping it's what I think it is do you time its use
Though if you lose Sectarus with it, that 6SPs lost
I won't go into the ins and outs of why it doesn't work
(Mainly because I don't want this to be any more negative)
But the point is this - it is incredibly situational
It does not work on the Nonliving
It assumes I want to kill the only huge buffed Elite that you use rather than just kill you
Even if I reanimate it, adding slow makes it situationally useful
It's great for Grimson but rubbish for Necropian Vampiress (who loses her teeth, a Slow short-hop flyer)
And then there is the tempo cost of always having the mana spare to reanimate
Also Zombies is best if you play Zombie support (Frenzy, Shaggoth etc)
Which means you might as well be playing Necromancer Zombies with level 2 Ziggurat
Though again that suffers from the same situational issues as Rise Again which is why it fails the cut
Time and time again we see this lack of understanding with situational cards
Steal Enchantment is level 3 (rationale must have been: you gain 1 quick action advantage)
Steal Equipment is level 3 (again same rationale)
Mind Control is level 6 (er, anyone who reads the forum what I think of it with the nerf)
But like Rise Again, Ziggurat and Animate Dead, all of them suffer from this issue:
"What makes you think that I want any cards of yours?"
This "situational" issue is why REACTIVE cards have to be lower spell level than PROACTIVE cards.
Otherwise the spell will just never get into books.
You have no idea how relevant this discussion is and why I jumped on this thread to explore issues.
Else we will just have same over-costed (in spell points) reactive spells that we have seen so far.
So, surely everybody must have a few "WTF?" cards they are willing to share?
I know AlexW will have to explain his hatred of Stumble (which I've discovered is actually nifty for FM).
Everyone makes mistakes (I certainly stumbled in this thread).
But not everyone realises they have made mistakes and why they have made it unless it's spelt out.
Sometimes I feel like a Lone Voice fighting my corner in vain so I came to the public forum for your help.
If nobody is willing to finger-point specific cards, does anybody agree or disagree with me?
-
I rank Bears Strength, Cheetah Speed, and Rhino Hide as must haves but that's just me.
@Silverclawgrizzly: Yes, interesting. Those spells all offer a unique and powerful effect. I can see why you would put them in every book. How many Bear Strength do you like, and how do you like to use it?
The list is definitely subjective, and as such there will be a lot of disagreement over different spells. I would personally change many of your spell rankings by as many as 2 ranks, but that's me. I am me and you are you, and this is how you would rank them. I do think the list could be useful for building spell books, but it is going to be a personal preference no matter how you cut it. The only benefit this list would have to other people is to get a glimpse into your mindset. Which is not a minor thing. Seeing how other people think and approach the game can give a person new insights that they might never have gotten on their own. For that, I thank you.
@Zuberi: I agree that this is a somewhat subjective exercise. (Though I suspect that's because we each have a partial picture and and imperfect assessment of how to deal with the objective truth.) I am incredibly curious to "get a glimpse into your mindset", and that of anyone else who is willing to share.
The scope is far too large
And the value of cards varies with the mages playing (cost-benefit), other cards in the book and your local meta
For example, AlexW, you posted Pushy Wizard hence Eagleclaw up there
Yet in my meta, Veteran's Belt + High Armour has nerfed Thorns Push and Wall Bash
Interesting though this discussion will be, it falls prey to the same assumptions fas723 made with "most efficient creatures"
The reality is you would need to map out a Kohonen Network of card interactions
Then apply it to a changing meta propensity to encounter opponent cards to evlaute this
For example, in a meta of Buffed Forcemasters, Curse Stacking and Buffed Elites, Purge Magic immediately becomes a valuable threat.
There are just so many dimensions that I think the thread's subject should be de-scoped to just one aspect
Broadly your 5 categories are:
(A) Always Golden (e.g. Teleport)
(B) Toolbox Golden (e.g. Purge Magic) - reacting to opponent's strategy
(C) Workhorse - the majority - just don't talk about these and cloud the issue
(D) Niche Strategy (e.g. Rajan's Fury) - useful only for certain own strategies
(E) Waste of Trees (e.g. Destroy Magic)
@DeckBuilder: First, I apologize. I put Stumble at 1 as sort of a joke because I have seen the community complain more about it than any other card. I agree that it's actually a roleplayer in some strategies, and should be a 2.
I agree that the scope is large, but I'm not certain that the scope is too large. I think we each have some pieces of whatever the "true" metagame is, and as such consider each spell in a certain light. I guess my goal is to expose how we are each thinking about spells both so that we all gain by gaining insight into other player's evaluations, but also might have a greater understanding of the metagame by doing so.
I thought the flaw of "best" creatures is that it tried to a) objectively quantify each creature and b) failed to recognize that a large cadre of creatures can each be the best simultaneously. (This can be true because they are the best AT something, where that something is a thing a player wants to accomplish.) Certainly this list will be a moving target. As new spells are printed, or changes in the metagame happen, cards change in value. However, I do think some spells will have a somewhat constant value due to their general utility.
I think your A-E are substantially different from my 1-5. Namely, I don't think you have an equivalent to 3, and I think it's the most interesting distinction. Which spells are exactly good enough that you're almost never willing to pay out of school for them, but it's a snap deal when they are in school? I also think if something is "Toolbox Gold" it should probably be a 5. Most of the 4s I thought were pretty strategy dependent. Like, if you want a big, you probably think very hard about Grizzly Bear regardless of your book. However, not *every* book wants a big, and therefore Grizzly is not a 5. Does that make sense?
As far as Eagleclaw Boots go, sure, they are good against wall-push combo. However, they also offer a unique ability to a Mage (climbing), and there are a lot of mages who want to push/pull you: Plant Pit, Golem Pit, Forcemaster w/Bears, etc. Almost every opponent I've ever played, every book I've seen online, and every book I build seems to have 1+ pairs. Has your group eschewed them?
-
@ Lettucemode, Boomfrog, Webcatcher
Thank you for your interest.
Yes, yes, I can see where it can be used and you give very insightful feedback
But let me ask you this simple question...
"Have you ever played Destroy Magic or even included it (more than once) in a book?"
The Prosecution rests its case, your honour.
-
No, but I don't usually play a wizard. I suspect it would be meta dependent. If Charmyna's Banker build caught on I might take Destroy Magic.
Concerning Rise Again, I've seen opponents use it as a deterrent. Turned face up it means I either have to waste a dispel or make absolutely sure my opponent doesn't kill that creature, so I often end up playing more defensively.
-
So, surely everybody must have a few "WTF?" cards they are willing to share?
Okay, I can point a few fingers, in the hopes of learning something new:
Mana Siphon: I see little reason to choose this over essence drain. I suppose against a solo mage it might have some utility, but generally people have at least one creature, and essence drain pays for itself twice as fast (or destroys a creature cheaply, which is even better). I suppose Mana Siphon can't be dispelled, but I still don't see its utility.
Banish: This card seems too expensive to me for what it does. Remove a creature for 3 turns only to have it return unscathed for 14 mana? Why not summon my own strong creature with that mana, or do something else?
-
@Silverclawgrizzly: ... Yes, interesting. ... I can see why you would put them in every book. How many Bear Strength do you like, and how do you like to use it?
@Zuberi: ... I am incredibly curious to "get a glimpse into your mindset", and that of anyone else who is willing to share....
@DeckBuilder: I guess my goal is to expose how we are each thinking about spells both so that we all gain by gaining insight into other player's evaluations, but also might have a greater understanding...
Why do I get this feeling that we're all being analysed by a psychiatrist here?
"Hmmm. Interesting. Very insightful. Now tell me more about your mother..."
I just worry about when he PMs me his invoice... :)
Yeah, AlexW, I do realise that our categorisation are different.
My categorisation is a 2x2 grid quadrant really.
One one axis you have Proactive (based on my strategy) and Reactive (based on your strategy)
This is the point you brought up with Charmyna in the Banking Blaster thread
The other axis is Undercosted or Overcosted
But what you have brought in is a third dimension, making it a 2x2x2 cube
The z axis being Trained or Untrained
Where Undercosted or Overcosted removes the school of the spell in its evaluation (which mine included)
[Trained or Untrained] x [Reactive or Proactive] x [Undercosted or Overcosted] = 8 possible categories
Again, I think the scope is just too huge.
Which is why I focused on just 1 aspect (Proactive vs. Reactive) because it helps me in non-public debates
Even though I feel this subject needs de-scoping, I will be following this thread and hope contribute more soon.
-
Banish: This card seems too expensive to me for what it does. Remove a creature for 3 turns only to have it return unscathed for 14 mana? Why not summon my own strong creature with that mana, or do something else?
I think it's right to compare this spell to Turn to Stone, Force Hold, and/or Sleep. It's a spell designed to neutralize a big for a while so you can do something without it bothering you. On the front end 14 is a tremendous amount of mana. Turn to Stone for 3 turns costs 14 as well, Force Hold for 3 turns costs 10, and Sleep 7/9/11 on level 4/5/6. I think a premium is being paid since Banish works on anything. That said, I'm not generally willing to pay for Turn to Stone, and Force Hold isn't my thing either. I like Sleep more since it is so cheap, *and* requires some kind of resource expenditure from my opponent to end it. I guess if level 6 nonliving summons started to be a big thing, I might consider a Banish? But until then, it shall remain forlorn.
-
@Deckbuilder,
I have found Rise Again to be almost magical against the Druid. She likes to put a Vine Snapper in the same zone as her tree to protect it. I like to put Rise Again on it, then kill the Vine Snapper, making sure I have enough mana on hand to cast it when it finally dies. Now, I don't have to stay near the Tree getting zapped by vines exploding thorns like crazy and being still for those hard hitting stationary critters of the Druids. I can shoot off a fireball (Wand of Fieballs) pull back and let a mid-critter finish off the snapper and now I have two critters chomping on the tree and the snapper is quite efficient at it. When the end is nigh I get close and pop in a Fireball. That Intercept stuff works both ways...
-
Spells which are reliant on opponent's build need to be cheap in levels
Else they won't be put into books on the off chance when there is so many others competing
The Opportunity Cost is simply too high just for an off-chance
I have nothing against the in-game cost
Purge Magic - 12 mana, range 1, quick spell (QC flexibility), can be Nullified
Destroy Magic - 16 mana, range 1, full action (mage stationary)
That seems imminently fair
What I have trouble is the spell points cost
4SP toolbox will never get into a book
Toolbox spells that rely on opponent's build have to be low level for game variety
That is a really good point and I can't help but agree.
Have you ever played Destroy Magic or even included it (more than once) in a book?
Nope, have never played the card or even included it in a book.
-
And I think of rise again as costing 2 + X where X is the level of the creature (I think, I'm not at home). You just don't pay X until the creature dies.
I just wanted to clarify that you have to reveal rise again and pay it's reveal cost BEFORE the creature dies. Once the creature dies, the enchant is discarded as well and you no longer have the opportunity to reveal it. This is a minor contention, since you can reveal after dice are rolled and before damage is dealt (except in the case of damage dealt during the upkeep stage, so no waiting to see how those burns turn out).
-
Okay, I can point a few fingers, in the hopes of learning something new:
Mana Siphon: I see little reason to choose this over essence drain. I suppose against a solo mage it might have some utility, but generally people have at least one creature, and essence drain pays for itself twice as fast (or destroys a creature cheaply, which is even better). I suppose Mana Siphon can't be dispelled, but I still don't see its utility.
Banish: This card seems too expensive to me for what it does. Remove a creature for 3 turns only to have it return unscathed for 14 mana? Why not summon my own strong creature with that mana, or do something else?
That's more like it, ACG! Let me try to help out here.
MANA SIPHON
In Denial Wizard, I play Mana Siphon with Essence Drains, Obelisk, Orb, Cloak, Armour Ward, Wardstones
Because every extra point of denial is better than last as a spell's cost = mana cost/(channel-burdens)
Using your zones to deny mana is actually more effective than increasing your mana (or that's my theory)
But it's a strategy you have to go all in
I generally use it as early as possible, and like it
It serves these purposes
(a) it destroys the opponent's carefully micro-managed maths at the start
(b) I want to deny more than 3 mana Essence Drain costs (1 for my Ring, 2 for when reveal before Upkeep)
(c) its incredibly resilient (with ethereal less popular) and distracts the opponent's units from attacking me
In Mana Denial, you are simply trading
Essence Drain is trading your 2 SPs for his 1-2 SPs Dispel (1 of 6 max.) and 3 mana (a good trade)
Mana Siphon is trading 3SPs and 11 mana for a few turns of distraction plus 2 mana for each turn surviving
In isolation, none of them work well but combined, they hurt incredibly when your channel 7 has burden 6
I'm pretty sure you play Magic, ACG, and you know how the control decks leverage mana advantage to win
It's just the same here - but it was very frustrating for the opponent which is why I don't play it anymore
There's an old thread "Is mana denial viable?" where piousflea taught a new poster called DeckBuilder a few lessons on this strategy.
Mana Siphon is good - but only in conjunction with all the other Mana Denial tools that the Wizard has.
BANISH
This one is harder to justify as I have never ever played it or even included it in a Wizard book.
Your opponent has Lord of Fire with Bear Strength, Cheetah Speed, Mongoose Agility, Vampirism on it.
That's a lot of eggs in 1 basket.
In theory, a Wand of Banish will probably cost you 1 rounds mana in every 3 to remove it from the game.
Nowadays it would be Shaggoth Zora bloated with 6 Crawlers emerging from it. You can't sleep Shaggoth.
It's not much different to Turn to Stone which costs 12 mana for those 3 turns.
Yeah Force Crush is better for 12 but that's too expensive, Force Hold is just 9 in 3 turns.
But all 3 of those are suddenly Dispelled and the creature is ready to not-so-surprise attack you.
Banish is a tempo play like Sleep and above enchantments (ok, Force Crush can be part of a Win Condition)
Is it good? Well, I've never played it.
And whip Vinewhip Staff, I can't see anybody relying solely on a single Timmy behemoth strategy anymore.
Banish it will be great if creatures with a coming-into-play or leaving-play disadvantage become popular.
So maybe it's just "ahead of its time"?
Oh, who am I kidding, I can't defend Banish, sorry.
-
@Deckbuilder,
I have found Rise Again to be almost magical against the Druid. She likes to put a Vine Snapper in the same zone as her tree to protect it. I like to put Rise Again on it, then kill the Vine Snapper, making sure I have enough mana on hand to cast it when it finally dies. Now, I don't have to stay near the Tree getting zapped by vines exploding thorns like crazy and being still for those hard hitting stationary critters of the Druids. I can shoot off a fireball (Wand of Fieballs) pull back and let a mid-critter finish off the snapper and now I have two critters chomping on the tree and the snapper is quite efficient at it. When the end is nigh I get close and pop in a Fireball. That Intercept stuff works both ways...
That's really clever. Plants with their high hit points become Resilient and are Rooted not Slow so not even Stunned. Wow!
It's almost like the designers did this on purpose...:)
Learnt 2 good things about Mage Wars in this thread
-
Plants with their high hit points become Resilient and are Rooted not Slow so not even Stunned. Wow!
The not being stunned is an excellent reason to reanimate plants (thornlashers especially). However, reanimated creatures do not gain the Resilient trait (which is probably a good thing).
So you are saying that Mana Siphon is useful in a committed Mana Denial strategy; I guess I can see that. I don't play mana denial any more for much the same reasons you don't (not much fun for the other person), so for me it has no place.
I like the comparisons of Banish to Turn to Stone; I actually occasionally run Turn to Stone. I think I prefer to pay the mana over several turns rather than up front, though. But yes - if your opponent has all their eggs in one basket, a Banish every 3 rounds leaves them wide open.
I'm pretty sure you play Magic, ACG, and you know how the control decks leverage mana advantage to win
Actually, I am not really much of a Magic player. I've played once or twice, but I don't like the CCG model of distribution, so I don't buy them.
-
Creatures enchanted with Turn to Stone or hit with Sleep can still be buffed, and the enchantment or condition itself can be gotten rid of the next turn, or sooner if the other player anticipated it. Banish however has no such counter-play. That's why I consider it the superior answer to one-big-rush strategies like Adramelech.
-
@Silverclawgrizzly: ... Yes, interesting. ... I can see why you would put them in every book. How many Bear Strength do you like, and how do you like to use it?
@Zuberi: ... I am incredibly curious to "get a glimpse into your mindset", and that of anyone else who is willing to share....
@DeckBuilder: I guess my goal is to expose how we are each thinking about spells both so that we all gain by gaining insight into other player's evaluations, but also might have a greater understanding...
Why do I get this feeling that we're all being analysed by a psychiatrist here?
"Hmmm. Interesting. Very insightful. Now tell me more about your mother..."
I just worry about when he PMs me his invoice... :)
Many have tried to analyze me int he past :)
To answer your question it depends on the mage with most of them I use 1 Bear Strength, 1 Rhino Hide, and 1 Cheetah Speed but with nature classes I'll put in 2 of each minimum. Generally one for my mage and one for valued creatures.
-
Creatures enchanted with Turn to Stone or hit with Sleep can still be buffed, and the enchantment or condition itself can be gotten rid of the next turn, or sooner if the other player anticipated it. Banish however has no such counter-play. That's why I consider it the superior answer to one-big-rush strategies like Adramelech.
That's a good point. Also Turn to Stone has a 6 point upfront cost too.
Yes, I am starting to see the value of Banish. Thank you, ACG and Lettuce, for the insight.
Force Hold is my favourite control card (for FM: 2+1 with ring, upkeep 2 with orb is amazing)
Maybe that's why I didn't give Stumble attention (until now)
The not being stunned is an excellent reason to reanimate plants (thornlashers especially). However, reanimated creatures do not gain the Resilient trait (which is probably a good thing).
Guess who stopped reading when he saw "Slow" on Reanimates...?
These Reanimates are even more rubbish than I thought.
However sIKE's trick of Rise Again on Vine Snapper Treebond guard is still great.
Hmm, I may give Rise Again a spin in a combative Sectarus Curse Warlock build.
But it's such situational 3SP card, only useful against a handful of Living targets.
If only there was a better Dark Living than Hellion as a good guaranteed target...
Naah, it's just too much of a long shot gamble for 3SPs - but probably yes for 2SPs.
Which proves my point about opponent-build based spells needing to be lower level.
Would there be more Reversal of Fortune fun if Steals were more common at level 2?
-
@Deckbuilder
I find either a Rise Again or Animate Dead both are level 3 spells, one is two points more than other. What do both buy me? In one game a half-cost steel clawed grizzly, yeah he was slow, until that Zombie Frenzy. I think that ends up being a good deal for me, as the Necro's zombies are only useful in groups, the skellies are ok but really don't deal a lot of dice of damage and you really can not buff that other than with Commands. The nice thing about Rise Again, though it costs two more, is that I don't have to be at range for it to payoff and it is a Quick cast vs. a Full cast for the Animate Dead. The nice thing about Animate Dead against a Druid is that the creature you pull back into the arena comes into the zone that you are in, think Vine Tree. I of course have to stay still for that round or have some other mechanic to move (push/tele) to get out of that zone. So they both have strengths and weaknesses and with a little thought you can play to the strengths and minimize the weaknesses.
-
So we;ve had under the microscope...
* Destroy Magic
* Rise Again
* Mana Siphon
* Banish
All of them proven to have some utility to varying degrees.
Surely there must be some other cards that people want to place with Gate to Hell?
What about understanding Opportunity Cost?
You can only wear 1 Belt
Regrowth and Veteran's Belt are both great
Colossus Belt is not only situational but never going to compete in that hotly contested slot
Colossus Belt - I hereby consign you to join Gate to Hell
Much like a new Cloak would have to be as good as Elemental
But any old Helmet would be added to many Forge builds.
Well, we all know there are lots of sub-optimal cards, especially creatures
Er, was there a Gorilla in the core set? Faeries? Leeches? Harpies? Trolls?
Creatures are just too easy a target as there are a lot of parameters to balance.
What's really interesting are those cards that are potentially useful but you just can't see the use for it.
Stranglevine seems over-costed - but then again it kills Blasting Banker with its ranged only attacks.
What we really need are a few brave souls to accuse some grey area cards of not being that good really.
Surely someone else will bite? (Where's Aylin when you need some lively debate on this forum...)
I know I have learnt at least 3 new things from this thread so far. To question is to learn.
-
No card ranking discussion proceed without mentioning how terrible Psylock is.
-
No card ranking discussion proceed without mentioning how terrible Psylock is.
On a scale of 1 to 10: 1 being sucks the south bound end of a north bound donkey 10 being Kate Upto
0
This is mainly due to low armor, life, and flying and Push. Any one thought about a tangle vine on it to give it the unmovable trait?
-
What about understanding Opportunity Cost?
You can only wear 1 Belt
Regrowth and Veteran's Belt are both great
Colossus Belt is not only situational but never going to compete in that hotly contested slot
Colossus Belt - I hereby consign you to join Gate to Hell
Much like a new Cloak would have to be as good as Elemental
But any old Helmet would be added to many Forge builds.
Very good thought (not surprising it comes from you though ;))!
Im very curious how cursed equips might work - not sure if they are in planning, but they would definitively be very cool since you could block such valuable slots as the belt!
No card ranking discussion proceed without mentioning how terrible Psylock is.
On a scale of 1 to 10: 1 being sucks the south bound end of a north bound donkey 10 being Kate Upto
0
This is mainly due to low armor, life, and flying and Push. Any one thought about a tangle vine on it to give it the unmovable trait?
I agree Psylok is on the lower end of a power cards list. Giving it tanglevine would be a very interesting move fore sure, but I doubt it will do alot of damage afterwards ;).
So let me throw in some more spellpoint sink cards:
I believe most if not all holy attack spells (well atm we have only two: Pillar of Light, Blinding Flash) are by far too inefficient in general. Sure, against non-living creatures the damage to mana ratio is fine and the stun chance is quite nice, but I doubt someone would use a single target attack spell (Pillar) against a zombie with resilient. So the only situation I could see Blinding Flash being useful is if you are trapped in a zone full of zombies. In that scenario I guess most would prefer to use teleport instead of Blinding Flash (its a full cast with 0 range). In the end, this card seems to be useful in such a narrow niche that I would not spend two spellpoints even as the priest(ess).
-
What would happen I wonder if there were some effect that gave items Upkeep like Mordoks Obelisk does for creatures....
-
What would happen I wonder if there were some effect that gave items Upkeep like Mordoks Obelisk does for creatures....
That would be a very strong card, difficult to balance I guess.
-
I could actually see the dwarven warlord being able to do it.
-
What we really need are a few brave souls to accuse some grey area cards of not being that good really.
Surely someone else will bite?
I'll give it a shot...
[mwcard=MW1E22]Hellfire Trap[/mwcard]
Does anyone actually use this card? I have played one game against this card and I just ran my Dark Pact Slayer right through it. Now the damage/mana ratio is actually pretty nice...if it doesn't get Seeking Dispel'd or something. Maybe once the new Warlock comes out, IF GtH + Pentagram see more play, it will be worth placing this card in those zones to protect those conjurations. Who knows though.
[mwcard=MW1J02] Animal Kinship[/mwcard]
(http://)
How about this one, does anyone use this? Personally I feel like it is very situational - you have to be playing multiple types of creatures when it's often better to just focus on one or two (wolves + bear). And if you're doing that the other totems work better. Maybe Deckbuilder considered this for his pre-DvN Tempo Beastmaster book?
[mwcard=DNI01] Animate Dead[/mwcard]
I do not this this card is worth playing at all. I could just use Rise Again so the creature shows up behind enemy lines. Or just summon a Zombie Brute. Either one of those is better than a Slow Grizzly who will take 3 turns to get to where the action is.
[mwcard=FWI02] Earthquake[/mwcard]
(http://)
Pretty terrible. I can't think of a reason to include it in a book unless the opponent is heavy on Conjurations (Druid I guess)? Difficult to time for the Slam on creatures as well.
[mwcard=FWE02] Circle of Fire[/mwcard]
Not worth playing over Circle of Lightning.
[mwcard=FWI04] Force Wave[/mwcard], [mwcard=FWI07] Repulse[/mwcard]
(http://)
Are these used often in Forcemaster books? I think they have very limited use, if any. Never got around to using one in any of my games.
[mwcard=MWSTX1CKC09] Giant Wolf Spider[/mwcard]
Don't see the value in this card at all, unless you're trying to kite or something. If you want a Stuck turret, [mwcard=MW1C35] Stonegaze Basilisk [/mwcard] is more effective IMO.
[mwcard=MW1Q30] Staff of Beasts[/mwcard]
(http://)
Seems pretty bad to me. Good in the Apprentice games to show new players some tricks, but it's more efficient to just attack with your mage for 4 dice than pay 2 mana for 2 dice.
-
I've tried animal kinship and repulse multiple times. I find both to be subpar. Kinship is too expensive and requires a long buildup. Repulse can work for getting you out of a creature scrum, but will do a worse job than mongoose ability.
-
No card ranking discussion proceed without mentioning how terrible Psylock is.
Psyloks are indeed terribe but not beyond hope.
All of these poor cards can be resuscitated if there was a will to do so
For example, imagine if this card came out...
Psychic Sensitivity, Cost 2+3, Enchant Creature, Range 0-2, Mind 1, Curse
This creature loses any Psychic Immunity
Psychic attacks gain +1 attack die against this creature
Now Mind Mage books can have Psychic spells, even Psylok (also helps Harpy)
This does not totally devalue Psychic Immunity, just helps vs. a bad match-up
It costs a premium (1SP, 4-5 mana, quick action) to bypass Psychic Immunity
So you may have paid for that ability but the opponents has paid to cancel it
It also provides a Psychic Only Marked for Death so is useful in any match-up
They need to create cards like this for Siren which then resuscitates old cards
So I believe rubbish creatures are actually very easy to fix
Either using new cards or by tweaking the rules just a bit
What I feel is far more difficult to fix is non-creature spells.
Here, let's take Charmyna's example: Light attack spells.
Nonliving is common in the current meta (Jelly, Golems and Spirits hate Light too for some reason)
Priest (guarded) + Dawnbreaker Ring + Hawkeye + Wand of Pillar of Light doesn't feel too shabby?
But here is a spell that is probably only good for 1 mage due to his ability and in a specific build too.
Blinding Flash however is another matter because it is 2SPs
it can be great in a Jelly/Golem Pit but it's just too situational, reliant on opponent's build.
This is where I feel they don't cost some spells properly.
Because there is a multipler, "how likely will I play it?" that is not applied to spell point cost.
They seem to fixate on level as indication of the power of the spell in the best possible case.
Instead of "what is a fair price in SPs to pay for this spell taking into account its likelihood to be useful?"
With Novice being used to give all mages access to "must have" cards (I'm looking at you, Water Wizard).
Because, as someone keeps on wisely saying : "it's (almost) all about the spell points!"
This is all linked to the same topic of many lower end cards: how situational is the card?
With an ever-growing pool, they can't continue to give levels to situational cards based on "potential full impact"
They need to multiply it with "% possibility of achieving full impact" and reduce situational card spell point costs
Else they'll never get played as competition for a place in your cram-packed 120 budget gets ever more difficult
As for current situational cards, they need to introduce mechanics to make them more reliable
Priest showed how to make Pillar of Light playable in a specific build (even then, dissolve the Wand)
For Psyloks (which started this post), a curse like Psychic Sensitivity would help (still not great)
But the main problem with Psyloks (and the rubbish Harpy scream) is the full action range 0 attack
I assume they had visions of Force Hold on victim while the Psyloks circled above which is possible
In the end, Psyloks and Blinding Flash are pretty hard to defend with the current pool of cards
My personal hate is Firestorm: I'd love to range 1 nuke but can't swallow its spell point cost.
Because like Destroy Magic, casting a full action spell at range 1 (don't hurt yourself) is tricky.
Has the existence of the Druid in the meta brought this card into play?
-
What about understanding Opportunity Cost?
You can only wear 1 Belt
Regrowth and Veteran's Belt are both great
Colossus Belt is not only situational but never going to compete in that hotly contested slot
Colossus Belt - I hereby consign you to join Gate to Hell
Much like a new Cloak would have to be as good as Elemental
But any old Helmet would be added to many Forge builds.
Very good thought (not surprising it comes from you though ;))!
Im very curious how cursed equips might work - not sure if they are in planning, but they would definitively be very cool since you could block such valuable slots as the belt!
No card ranking discussion proceed without mentioning how terrible Psylock is.
On a scale of 1 to 10: 1 being sucks the south bound end of a north bound donkey 10 being Kate Upto
0
This is mainly due to low armor, life, and flying and Push. Any one thought about a tangle vine on it to give it the unmovable trait?
I agree Psylok is on the lower end of a power cards list. Giving it tanglevine would be a very interesting move fore sure, but I doubt it will do alot of damage afterwards ;).
So let me throw in some more spellpoint sink cards:
I believe most if not all holy attack spells (well atm we have only two: Pillar of Light, Blinding Flash) are by far too inefficient in general. Sure, against non-living creatures the damage to mana ratio is fine and the stun chance is quite nice, but I doubt someone would use a single target attack spell (Pillar) against a zombie with resilient. So the only situation I could see Blinding Flash being useful is if you are trapped in a zone full of zombies. In that scenario I guess most would prefer to use teleport instead of Blinding Flash (its a full cast with 0 range). In the end, this card seems to be useful in such a narrow niche that I would not spend two spellpoints even as the priest(ess).
I said Psylock and was thinking Thoughtspore, Push into the Arena Walls is the main reason why both of these cards suck so hard. The thinking was to Tanglevine a Thoughtspore so it couldn't be pushed. I know this gives up the floating wand piece but will keep it useful as at least as a possible 2 ranged cannon.
-
I'll give it a shot...
That's better! Our programmer for OCTGN vents his frustration...
I will try my best to defend your cards, lettucemode (though most are really hard to justify)
Hellfire Trap - don't get me ranting about Mandatory Reveal
It would be so much more fun if Traps were not Mandatory Reveal
It's Dark 1, isn't it? So it's a 1SP Fire spell for Necro against Druid?
Animal Kinship - this is a Timmy card., right?
So that Timmy can boast my Beastmaster is +11 Armour and attacks for Melee +12!
(He forgets to mention his opponent was asleep and left him unmolested to do this)
Yes, this one is there with Gate to Hell in my books
Animate Dead - well, you can Wand this unlike Rise Again
Again for the type of player who doesn't want to win the game
Just kill every enemy creature then bring them back as zombies
Especially laughing at his Zombie Valshalla as it gets angrier
Sadly. his opponent will be attacking himself to end the pain...
Earthquake - I reckon it will become more useful
It's good at killing vines, damaging flowers and trees
I believe Earthquake is a "sleeper card" for the future
My issue with it is it's so meh, it's just this little tremor
Earthquake! should be Epic. arena wide, damaging all non-flying objects
"Did the earth move for you when I cast that spell?" - er, not really mate
Circle of Fire - agree Lightning is so much better
Especially since Dragonscale and Clloak is everywhere
Also all those creatures with Flame -2 or Lightning +2
But only Air Wizard pays 2SPs for a Circle of Lightning
A Druid who has run out of Dispels may not like it much
Burn is also a good weapon against Resilient Zombies
If Swarm becomes more popular, I could see it played
In fact, after Forged In Fire, this could be played more
Force Wave - this is the only spell in your list that I like
Yes, I've had some fun with Force Wave and Zombies
But the most fun I had was with my Jelly Hoover build
4 Jellies + Wand of Force Waves pushing them around
Only problem is when you hit the wall edges or corners
It was a hilarious fun build as locals are sick of Teleport
Force Wave is also ok vs. Swarm, there's an old post on it
Wall of Thorns is a very cheap way for spread damage
Repulse - ok, this I cannot defend really because random
If only it wasn't random but instead all in 1 chosen direction
Giant Wolf Spider - how much? For those stats? Next please.
And to add insult to injury, it's not even animal for synergy!
(Yes, arthropod) - I see other insects appearing in promos.
Staff of Beasts - this could be easily saved with this support card:
"When this mage heals a target, pay to remove 1 condition on it"
I believe this Paladin card is needed to make active healing better
We can't all be carrying Healing Wands in our left hands, it's silly!
So, in summary. here is where I stand with your list, Lettucemode:
Needs the Right Build - Force Wave
Awaiting Future Cards - Earthquake. Circle of Fire, Staff of Beasts
Only for Casual Play - Hellfire Trap, Animate Dead, Giant Wolf Spider
Lowest Plane of Hell - Animal Kinship, Repulse
Maybe others have found interesting uses for these subpar cards?
-
Once again I find these conversations very interesting. I played a Druid last week, who towards the end of the game I pushed a zone to the right and threw up two walls from top to bottom in-between my NC/FC zones, dividing the board in half. I then through a Hell Fire Trap (Druids don't like fire) at the bottom of the board. Now he had to go through it or Dispel it. IMHO a Win Win for me. Board control against a Druid, imagine that. The time it bought me, allowed me to get all of my slow/lumbering zombies together for one last frenzy of a meal.
Doesn't always work, but when it does.....
-
Heh. All right, I'll try my hand at this too:
Useless cards: (Definition: would never ever see in a spellbook, nor could I ever imagine a way it could ever become useful; waste of cardboard.)
Akiro's Battle Cry, Gate to Hell.
Almost useless cards: (Definition: useless except in very rare/niche circumstances, and even then almost certainly still not worth including since it is so terrible.)
Akiro's Hammer, Animal Kinship, Barracks, Colossus Belt, Defense Ring, Destroy Magic, Divine Might, Earth Elemental, Earthquake, Fellela Pixie Familiar, Force Bash, Giant Wolf Spider, Goblin Bomber, Horn of Gothos, Ichthellid, Invisible Stalker, Lay Hands, Mountain Gorilla, Pentagram, Repulse, Resurrection, Samara Tree, Screech Harpy, Staff of Beasts, Teleport, Temple of Light, Whirling Strike.
Interesting: I would have thought I would have more Useless cards, and less Almost Useless. If people are interested, I might do another post describing why some of those cards ended up in the Almost Useless category. Now for some disagreements about selections by other players:
Force Wave: I'm in agreement with DB on this. I also had one fun moment when I was trying to make a version of his BM Swarm deck work, where my opponent's mage had Eagleclaw Boots on: I used Force Wave to push all of his and my own creatures through a Wall of Thorns. Then my own creatures (all level 1) simply ran back through to attack the mage with +3 from Rajan's Furies. Niche card rarely included, but can be rather useful when it is.
Animate Dead: I actually prefer this to Rise Again: you have complete control of when and where you get the creature, you can select from anything in the discard pile when it's cast, it can't be Dispelled, and it costs less mana.
Circle of Fire: Reasonably good in the current meta, and while CoL is definitely better, I don't think it's +2 spellbook points better for a Warlock/Firewizard, for example.
Hellfire Trap: Situational use that can actually be somewhat useful in those situations. Not my favourite card, but there are lot of cards that are much, much worse.
-
Teleport
I would be interested in hearing why you believe Teleport is almost useless.
Samara Tree
The value of Samara Tree (and, more specifically, Seedling Pod) is in the delayed actions that it allows. Essentially, Seedling Pods allow you to put off making a decision about what to cast until you have seen your opponent's move, without having to waste one of your own actions. They are also useful on the rare occasion that you have nothing to do with your action. If you have a Samara Tree, then for a small fee (2 Mana per turn or 1 if harmonized) you can bank an action every turn indefinitely, until the tree is destroyed. I have found Samara Tree/Seedling Pod to be very useful. The point is to give yourself flexibility in the future, when you may need it. I would include Seedling Pods even in a deck without a Samara Tree, but the Tree is a nice option for a low cost.
-
Heh. Injecting a bit of humour there, with Teleport. That is a rather long list of cards to read through, after all. ; )
The problems I see with Samara Tree are myriad: it requires a prohibitive investment in mana for the rather minor benefits it provides; the much-better Vine Tree can cast the Seedling Pods as well; you rarely if ever have enough mana to make both trees truly useful; since they're Conjurations, more than one Pod can't be stacked in the same zone at the same time; it telegraphs to the opponent that Something Bad Is Coming In That Zone; and you rarely want to use more than 2-4 Seedling Pods in a typical game anyway (making the Cantrip aspect irrelevant).
-
Psyloks are indeed terribe but not beyond hope.
All of these poor cards can be resuscitated if there was a will to do so
For example, imagine if this card came out...
Psychic Sensitivity, Cost 2+3, Enchant Creature, Range 0-2, Mind 1, Curse
This creature loses any Psychic Immunity
Psychic attacks gain +1 attack die against this creature
I have also argued in the past for cards which negate psychic immunity. It was controversial.
-
Circle of Fire: I actually think this is one of the most important spells in the game. I think without considering interaction from an opponent, level 1 creature swarm falls just behind wall of thorns + push in how quickly you can kill an opponent clocking in easily on turn 4. (Wall push kills on turn 3.) Circle of Fire is by far the best way to kill a swarm of Hawks or Foxes, and as such is a spell I'm always thinking about splashing as a "silver bullet" for that kind of opponent. In the new druid metagame, I suspect it also offers some opportunities for real coups against plant pits.
-
I believe most if not all holy attack spells (well atm we have only two: Pillar of Light, Blinding Flash) are by far too inefficient in general.
I agree with this in general, but a Pillar of Light is actually very good in the hands of a Priest because you can use Malakai's Fire with it. Then we can compare Pillar of Light to other level 1 attack spells, like say Arc Lightning. I will be paying 1 extra mana for the Pillar (with Malakai's Fire) but I will do more damage on average, have a better chance at applying an effect, and have a longer range than the Arc Lightning. However the Arc Lightning is unavoidable. I'd say the Pillar has become quite viable.
-
Repulse at least doesn't have the extra cost for passage attacks pushes, so I imagine its best use is for defending a corner with passage attacks walls surrounding you. Maybe a popup sniper force master who could tanglevine grimson the repulse the hordes back through walls of fire?
-
I think the opposite, actually. I think repulse only works well in a square in the middle of the arena. This is because if you're next to a wall some of the creatures in the zone will be pushed and some will be wall bashed and you have no control over which. Repulse is an interesting, thematic card and I like it in theory, but in practice it won't work as well as mongoose agility or a self teleport.
-
[mwcard=MW1J02] Animal Kinship[/mwcard]
(http://)
How about this one, does anyone use this? Personally I feel like it is very situational - you have to be playing multiple types of creatures when it's often better to just focus on one or two (wolves + bear). And if you're doing that the other totems work better. Maybe Deckbuilder considered this for his pre-DvN Tempo Beastmaster book?
I have always had a man crush on AK. The most important thing about it is that the source of the buff is not preventable by blocking LoS, nullify, etc. It is the ultimate gravy boat card for the BM, and will be even better the day we get a cheap bear cub and little lizard added to the BM's quick cast pool
-
I used destroy magic in a battle!!! :o
It got agony, ghoul rot, and enfeeble off my forcemaster, and vampirism ad bear strength off the enemy warlock.
-
I think the opposite, actually. I think repulse only works well in a square in the middle of the arena. This is because if you're next to a wall some of the creatures in the zone will be pushed and some will be wall bashed and you have no control over which. Repulse is an interesting, thematic card and I like it in theory, but in practice it won't work as well as mongoose agility or a self teleport.
On the contrary, for only four mana it's definitely worth the price. It's not just a matter of which creatures, but how many. Less threats to deal with at once. Mongoose agility and teleporting yourself is useful. However, if you are restrained or slow, or if there's an enemy nullify on you, it's helpful to use repulse since it targets the zone rather than you or the creatures being pushed.