July 02, 2024, 01:32:38 AM

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Ravepig

Pages: 1 ... 10 11 [12] 13 14 15
166
Strategy and Tactics / Re: Help against Purge Magic
« on: April 22, 2016, 09:23:24 AM »
Well what is interesting is the wording of Nullify, which is if this creature is Targeted, which is what happens in Step 1 of casting a spell, and of course Jinx doesn't trigger until Step 2 of that process.

Ok, that's a solid point. So, Jinx on the casting mage and nullify on my mage would indeed both trigger when the opposing mage casts. I can live with that if that's the way the card reads, but I still can't wrap my mind around the logic- doesn't make sense if the jinx would stop the spell from being released and hitting the intended target (which, logically, is what should be required to trigger nullify).

So, really the only purpose of casting jinx over nullify is the cheaper reveal cost. I'm not sure I understand why use Jinx at all then (still very new to this game, so if I'm missing something obvious, I'm eager to learn).

Looking at the reveal cost vs. the benefit, Jinx seems pointless when compared to Nullify- which also takes us back to the original problem- there is no real way to stop purge magic other than casting a perfectly timed enchantment transfusion?

167
Strategy and Tactics / Re: Help against Purge Magic
« on: April 21, 2016, 11:51:26 PM »
I think his point was Jinx on the opponent, Nullify on yourself.

You know, it seems counter-intuitive, but both the Jinx on the caster and the Nullify on the target should be revealed when an Enchantment or Incantation is used by the caster on the target. My reasoning:

1) Both are revealed in the same (Counter Spell) step.

2) The trigger for mandatory reveal of Jinx is casting the spell, which happens as soon as the first step begins (so Nullify has not yet taken effect).

3) The trigger for mandatory reveal of Nullify is the creature being targeted by the spell, which happens prior to the Counter Spell step (so Jinx has not yet had a chance to go into effect).

You can choose to pay the mana cost for one or both, but neither will be around any longer once the one spell is cast since both are destroyed once resolved.

This, in essence, is just a restatement of what is in the other thread (mentioned by BoomFrog, above), but in a more general sense (as the target with Nullify can be any creature for this to happen).

I guess from my perspective, if I enchant the opposing mage with a hidden jinx and he casts, the jinx prevents the spell from actually being cast, thus the spell never hits the intended target, which is required to trigger nullify. Isn't this the purpose of Jinx?

168
World and Lore / Re: Official MW Lore: The Gods of Etheria
« on: April 20, 2016, 09:09:26 PM »
When i read Eisenach, [mwcard=FWC10]Ludwig Boltstorm[/mwcard] came to my mind. But he didnt have prostetic arm... is he? :)

Inspired by, but not Eisenach. :)


This is amazing! I'm a huge lore nerd so this kinda thing really hits the spot.

Thanks -- it's my goal (and AW's goal) to build more lore buzz in 2016! We have lots of cool stuff in the pipeline, interesting characters, and engaging stories to share!

My hope is that anyone who is interested in lore will ask questions about things they would like to hear more about, and that we'll provide a steady stream of epic/provocative material that will make that task easy!

Any follow up MW novels in the future?

169
Mages / Re: Is the arena wizard still OP?
« on: April 20, 2016, 10:04:45 AM »
...then this debate will never be resolved.

Quoted for truth. I don't see this being resolved, regardless of any of the above suggestions.

All the testing required to just prove a point. Whatever happened to just having fun?  ;) Playing 20+ structured games to prove a point does not sound like fun at all.

It's not just to prove a point. I actually am not entirely certain whether the wizard is still OP or not and would like to know. And you mean to tell me that playing 20+ games of Mage Wars isn't fun?

20 forced/structured games of anything does not sound fun at all. It takes away the fun of choice. Who I want to play, how I want to play, who my random opponent might be. When I'm forced to play this or that mage, and my opponent is forced to play this or that mage, over a schedule of multiple games, then suddenly, I lose interest. Part of the fun of mage wars is building my spell book how I want and playing what mage I want!

170
the new [mwcard=FWC04]Goblin Builder[/mwcard] to show that it can now repair Walls.

???
we realy need a new official rules supplement!
(am i the only player who didn't buy a new box?)

sounds like I got into this game at the right time.  ;) Will there be a reprinting of Druid vs. Necro? My buddy can't seem to find one for sale. Fortunately, I grabbed the last one our local game shop had in stock.

171
Mages / Re: Is the arena wizard still OP?
« on: April 18, 2016, 04:34:48 PM »
iNano78 makes a really solid case for proving the wizard is OP without spending tons and tons and tons of time trudging through forced game-play. When you look at his case, it's very well thought out and uses complete logic. Also, I would agree- this whole discussion is based on a hypothesis- which are often developed by anecdotal experience.

One of the first rules of philosophy is asking the question- what does the majority believe to be true about X? Granted, this isn't an empirical basis for finding truth, but it is a starting point. My point: In reading these threads, I haven't seen one person argue AGAINST the wizard being OP, yet most seem to agree that he is.

So maybe the solution in determining whether the Wizard is OP or not is as simple as what iNano78 proposes.

I for one think it is.

172
Mages / Re: Is the arena wizard still OP?
« on: April 18, 2016, 12:17:16 PM »
...then this debate will never be resolved.

Quoted for truth. I don't see this being resolved, regardless of any of the above suggestions.

All the testing required to just prove a point. Whatever happened to just having fun?  ;) Playing 20+ structured games to prove a point does not sound like fun at all.

173
@RavePig That's why I have nullifies and jinxes and extra copies of enchantments. I'll make it difficult for them to cast purge magic, and if they succeed I punish them for it. You don't want to let up on the aggression with this deck.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Ah- didn't see the two Jinx included.

174
I think once your opponent casts purge magic on your grizzly, the beastmaster is toast.

175

-rejig costings on some of the cards. gate to hell costs 24 mana, in total, to cast and use?
-wizard pays triple cost for every element that is not his.


Why 24 mana for Gate to Hell? I've not used this card yet, but from what I've seen others post about this card I get the impression it's not used often.

Wizard paying triple cost for every element other than his own is a brilliant idea in my opinion.

176
Mages / Re: Is the arena wizard still OP?
« on: April 15, 2016, 02:51:10 PM »
[mwcard=MWBG1A03]Hurl Meteorite[/mwcard] is a Full Cast spell and cant be bound to a Wand. You can only carry 4 in your book. You couldn't cast Meteor and the Wizards Tower in the same turn after previously casting meteor in the previous round and even if you did you wouldn't have the mana to cast whatever is bound to the WT.

Meet cheese with stinker cheese, move a couple of zones cast Wall of Thorns and push the mana depleted Wizard through it a couple of times and you will win. Its cheesy and it stinks but you will break that Hurl Meteorite habit real quick.

But it does make a fantastic "surprise" long range finisher.....


Why can't Hurl Meteorite be bound to an elemental wand?

177
General Discussion / Re: Barbarian vs. Sorcerer
« on: April 15, 2016, 12:29:31 AM »
Damn that dude on BoardGameGeek spreading unsubstantiated rumours like that...

I just made the connection- ha ha ha ha. Nice.

178
General Discussion / Re: Barbarian vs. Sorcerer
« on: April 14, 2016, 09:58:28 PM »
Shapeshifter would be very cool- Agreed!

179
General Discussion / Re: Mage Type Win/Loss Record
« on: April 14, 2016, 01:08:08 PM »
You should probably also mention what sets your playgroup has, in addition to your win/loss records. Otherwise your answers might not mean anything because you will all be playing different metas.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Well collectively, we have three core sets, Spell Tombs 1 and 2, 2 of all expansions (only 1 of DvN), 1 Domination and multiple Academy sets. Not sure if this helps. As of right now, there are 4 in our play group (we have two tables going every Tuesday and some Saturdays). All games have been Arena thus far. Have not tried Domination mode. Is this what you were asking?

180
Strategy and Tactics / Re: Help against Purge Magic
« on: April 14, 2016, 01:05:02 PM »
Jinx and nullify are both mandatory triggers during the counter step. Wouldn't they both be revealed on the first cast and leave nothing for the second just like a nullify reverse magic combo?

Not if you play Jinx on your opponent's mage

Pages: 1 ... 10 11 [12] 13 14 15