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.
I looked in the back middle of Hall A you weren't there. Are you in the hall c?for folks arriving at the con. i am holding some tables near the back middle of hall a.Awesome I'm on my way zot
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-J327A using Tapatalk
for folks arriving at the con. i am holding some tables near the back middle of hall a.Awesome I'm on my way zot
I think you missed a point. There is ONE, countem, one, zombie in this game that can heal itself at all, and nobody plays it. Anything raised with rise again or the like has finite life and CANNOT heal at all, in any way. So even though it doesn't lose the trait "regenerate 2" it still cannot recover any accrued damage ever.Theres a zombie with reconstruct ability? Which one is that again?
1. Customization is a huge part of the appeal of this game. We need the ability to play custom spellbooks in organized play events3. I'd like to know if a MW format of 60 SBP's instead of 120 SBP's would improve the game.If we were to have a simpler format I think i would prefer pre-built spellbooks rahter than building them with 60 points. This way they could have very simple strategies, be thematic and also we could build them to play well vs eachother. For example the Arraxian crown warlock could have a book with 60 points worth of curses and only the wizard would have any enchantment removal. That could be balanced since nobody would run cards like force crush and against other mages the warlock would also lack good anwsers.
This would make new entries easier imo - less new cards to digest at the outset.
Spellbooks would likely be much more focused on a certain strategy and less cookie cutter.
Games could be finished much faster, allowing you to play more games in the same time span and potentially opening the door to a real (Swiss) tournament format that can be played in 1 day without putting time restrictions on the games.
I have personally always felt that 120 SBP's were too much because nearly every book has counters to almost every possible threat. Make books focus more on their strategy by taking away all those bonus SBP's and hoser cards and you might be surprised how entertaining the format could be with all kinds of different strategies clashing with each other and not with a hoser card.
I think this could be good since:
The players don't need to worry about building books.
The books would be straightforward, thematic and easy to play.
Finally there would be no good or bad matchups.
The downside I can see is that it might be hard to build the books in a good way which would meet all the requirements.
Magic is fun if you do drafts because at least there you can see a certain variation of cards used - because you just don't always draft the cards you need. So by design the decks there vary.
But if you look at standard.. it's fun the first few weeks after the release, but the following month after the pro tour it's dull as heck because everyone who plays seriously (with ambition) is playing the same deck the pros play. You may see some slight variation in the sideboard, but apart from that you know exactly what cards your opponent has as early as in t1 or t2.
You are right, the different decks don't use the same cards but everyone is using the same decks and that it far worse than overlaps in essential cards, what you have in Mage Wars.
It might be the same in Mage Wars if we had a "pro scene" as well, who knows, but since we don't have a pro scene everyone builds there deck as THEY think it is best and not just copying it from the internet. That alone is reason enough for me why I prefer Mage Wars.
Hi Enti,
As you point out, if MW had a "pro scene" I think you'd notice the exact same situation : lots of players bringing the same, latest powerbuild netdeck to a tournament.
However, I can't speak for "Standard" as I only play Legacy.
I think however it may be safe to say that standard may have somewhat less variety & power builds because of its limited card pool.
From my Legacy experience last year I can however say that I'm very pleased with the number and variety of competitive Legacy decks.
The "fantastic time" I'm having with it is because I like to build my own decks and not netdeck.
The challenge here lies of course in the fact that anything you come up with has to be able to stand up against the decks to beat.
I agree that in Magic tournament settings, you likely know what you're up against after your opponents' first two turns.
In MW however I usually know what my opponent has in his book BEFORE we even sit down.
Likely, at least one Dissolve, Dispel, Bear Strength, Force Push, Teleport, Regrowth, Rhino Hide, Surging Wave, Hurl Rock, Pillar of Righteous Flame, Tanglevine etc ...
That's what I dislike in MW by now : every book using too many identical staple cards from all different spell schools.Apart from that, being able to choose from your whole deck every single turn adds so much more depth to the game.. Makes it so much more important to predict what your enemy might want to do, imho that's something unique no other game has.
That's what I thought as well.
But not anymore.
IMO 120 SBP's is too much. ( at least 20 too much imo )
A book's base strategy cards can usually be built with +/- 60 SBP's.
That leaves way too much SBP's to cherrypick a Toolbox of counter cards especially because you often need only 1 copy of a card due to the non-random draw in MW.
So many extra SBP's also means you can too easily tap into other schools.
This has two very negative results imo
1- games take way too long to play out as card after card can be countered or neutralized until someone eventually runs out of counters.
2- the different schools mean nothing outside the bookbuilding phase as any mage can freely cherrypick and cast any spell he likes ( with some restrictions to some mages alright )
If I compare that with Magic TG
1- Decks are much more refined and tuned because of the random draw.
In magic every card in your deck has to advance your strategy.
If you put a "bad" card in your MW book, you're not necessarily hindered by it. You'll likely find out after a couple of plays that you never play it during a game or that the card doesn't fit but you won't suffer any gameplay consequences right away.
If you put a "bad" card in your Magic deck this can cause you to lose the game.
You can draw it into your hand thereby wasting a turn and giving your opponent one more turn to beat you.
So because of the Random Draw Magic deckbuilding needs more skill imo than MW bookbuilding and it also leads to less ( needlessly ) drawn out games.
2- The different schools actually mean something in Magic.
Figuring out how many and which Lands exactly you need to run in your deck are one of the key aspects of succesful deckbuilding. They also limit what you can play in your deck and whatnot.
In MW this doesn't matter at all. It's too easy for every mage imo to just use any spell from any school in general.
With more expansions (potentially ) coming out and thus more power cards coming out this only leads to spellbooks looking more and more identical as the number of "staples" will only grow.
So, I think MW has a problem here.
There are Toolbox decks in Magic too, like the old Survival of the Fittest decks or the more recent Green Sun's Zenith based decks but in general, most competitive decks are finely tuned decks with a specific strategy and without any "fat" on it.
In MW every spellbook is actually a Toolbox of Counters with a certain Mage and a strategy for him tacked on.
This leads to games taking way too long and becoming too repetitive after a number of games imo.
