The value Mana Flower and Mana Crystal

[aquestrion]

Can you have 6 dwarf kiesg in your deck so only 12 creatures would be cast

[reddawn]

Using all your mana every turn is a very bad way to play. It makes you mana starved and predictable. Opponent know you can't cast a spell that is over your channeling. That is why I prefer to do some big casting in first few turns then cast low mana cost spells to get in the 15-20 mana range at beginning of my turn. Always have 1 spell you want to cast and 1 spell to counter the thing you fear most your opponent would cast that turn. That way you build up a mana pool, allowing you to drop the bomb at the right time.

I rarely use all of my mana for a given round, but I do often spend most of it. 2-4 left over unless I'm going melee with my mage.

There's nothing wrong with spending all your mana, as long as your opponent is doing the same.  If you don't spend enough mana, you risk getting behind in board position and actions.  I.e., if your opponent plays a large creature, you need to play one of similar strength that ideally counters their creature, or some cost-efficient removal that takes it out of the fight for a while (sleep, turn to stone, etc).  It's more about reacting properly to the current situation than trying to hoard your mana.

Generally, I don't usually want to be the first player to make a big play because it leaves you open to getting countered in the next round, but depending on how your dice rolls go and the creatures you have left, sometimes you just have to bite the bullet and make the play so you dont get too far behind.

[Wildhorn]

If you spend all your mana, you are just telling me: "You can go FFA on me, I can't reveal any Nullify, Block, Reverse Attack, etc.".

[sIKE]

Rings are great, but they are specific, a Flowers mana can be used for any spell you have in the spellbook.

IMO, mirroring the opponents mana utilization is allowing him to dictate the game, if he is a Warlock saving for Adramelech, I am supposed to  hold on to my mana until then not utilizing my actions? I perceive that there is nothing wrong in spending all of your mana, each round if you want. Now there is a grain of salt in there, if you are casting out mandatory Enchantments you need to reveal costs on hand etc. In game there are very few things that have 0 mana or 5 having mana on hand that will make a big difference (other than the previously mentioned hidden Enchantments).

The point is about increasing your channeling to enable an action efficiency on spells cost a bit more than your typical channeling rate over the game. Mage Actions are your most valuable commodity in the game, having to skip a round to save enough to bring out a [mwcard=FWC01]Dwarf Kriegsbiel[/mwcard] once is ok but you get to the point very quickly where you are wasting an action to save the mana needed. I guess you could equip a Meditation Amulet for those cases but then that is yet another action needed to get this out (in a mom-BF build).

[reddawn]

IMO, mirroring the opponents mana utilization is allowing him to dictate the game, if he is a Warlock saving for Adramelech, I am supposed to  hold on to my mana until then not utilizing my actions? I perceive that there is nothing wrong in spending all of your mana, each round if you want. Now there is a grain of salt in there, if you are casting out mandatory Enchantments you need to reveal costs on hand etc. In game there are very few things that have 0 mana or 5 having mana on hand that will make a big difference (other than the previously mentioned hidden Enchantments).

What I meant wasn't that you mirror you opponent; just try to recognize the situation and anticipate what's going to happen based on what mage you're against, and then try to play a card that will deal with that situation as best you can.  I.e., If you're a Druid vs a Warlock and you suspect an Adramelech play (not hard to guess if the Warlock is saving up mana for a few rounds), you should have something other than your typical plant card ready to deal with that (probably Tarok w/buffs or Samandriel if you really need a good counter).       

And you don't stop playing cards altogether if you see your opponent being frugal with mana and you don't know what they're up to; you just play cards (usually creatures) that are "generically good" that are just meant to be all-around solid ways to increase your board presence and dice count rather than counter specific kinds of creatures.  Creatures without special abilities but have good stats and low cost are pretty much meant for that exact purpose, such as Orc Butchers, Skeletal Sentries/Minions,  Timber Wolves/Falcons/Foxes, etc.           

I suspect that's the reason why Steelclaws have become popular, since they're pretty much the biggest creature you can play that is "generically good," especially with Wizards, who mainly have creatures that are more specialized rather than all-around-ers.

[DaveW]

If you spend all your mana, you are just telling me: "You can go FFA on me, I can't reveal any Nullify, Block, Reverse Attack, etc.".

If you like to play fast with mana, it's a good idea to toss out a Decoy or two during the course of the game for just this reason... to pay those reveal costs when your opponent thinks you can't.

[reddawn]

Spending an action to play a decoy doesn't seem like a good idea.  Outside of that legendary fairy, I don't see much of a point in actually using them other than to break suspected nullifies...and you can do that with any enchantment with little risk as long as you have more than 1 copy.

Idk, I've never found myself using Decoy.  There's plenty of other cards that actually do things, like the super-cheap commands or just basic melee.

[sIKE]

Spending an action to play a decoy doesn't seem like a good idea.  Outside of that legendary fairy, I don't see much of a point in actually using them other than to break suspected nullifies...and you can do that with any enchantment with little risk as long as you have more than 1 copy.

Idk, I've never found myself using Decoy.  There's plenty of other cards that actually do things, like the super-cheap commands or just basic melee.

@reddawn,

I think the point was to bank a couple of Decoys and then leave yourself with zero mana. The opponent then sees that you have no mana and makes a move based off of that assumption. You then reveal the Decoys, charge you mana battery up X amount and use that newly available mana to pay for that hidden enchantment.

[Moonglow]

Wow, that's like a double decoy!

If you spend all your mana, you are just telling me: "You can go FFA on me, I can't reveal any Nullify, Block, Reverse Attack, etc.".

If you like to play fast with mana, it's a good idea to toss out a Decoy or two during the course of the game for just this reason... to pay those reveal costs when your opponent thinks you can't.

[baronzaltor]

If you cast them just to reveal them later as "banked" mana, you can use Enchanter's Ring and cast them on friendly targets.  Then when revealing them you're actually gaining more than you spent to cast the decoys (assuming you use enough enchantments for Enchanters Ring to pay for its own cost, which is typically the case.)