So . . . who, what, when, how @ Dice tower con?

[Shad0w]

Two draws doesn't seem very promising from a time standpoint, especially if matches are taking 3 hours (that seems totally excessive, honestly).  Is the intention for comp play to have a standard time limit or will it fluctuate?  This distinction is pretty important because time limits affect the viability of certain ways of playing the game, and thus balance.

I completely agree and thus advocate the 75-90min rounds. 75min seems ideal from all the events I have run

[Fentum]

Thank you very much, DrMark, for the summary of your matches.

[labartels]

Glad to see some details. I am looking forward to the full reports and deck lists.
Might I add....I hope everyone had FUN! 

[Koz]

These results seem a little...odd.  3 hour games?  Multiple games ending in draws?  Why wasn't a time limit implemented for this tournament?  How many players were there?

And...HOW were the games running so long?  I haven't had games last that long since my first two games...

[piousflea]

This solidifies something that myself and my play group (me, Steve, Tim, and John - collectively we have #1/#2 at Bashcon and #1/#2/#4 at Origins) have suspected for quite a while:
Mage Wars turns into a completely different game depending on the time limit for matches.

When we play casually with no time limit, many of us have been building relatively slow-starting, defensively-oriented builds. With enough defensive cards and skillful play you can hold off "beatdown" builds, turn the corner and eventually win. Problem is, none of those slow decks can hope to win in less than 2 hours, even though we are fairly quick with our playing. They would never win a single game in a 90 minute format.

When we practice for 75-90 minute tournament time limits, every one of us ends up with a one-dimensional beatdown deck. Not because that's the only way to play the game, but because of the time limit.

At Origins I'd said something about not wanting >2 hour limits because it would just be too exhausting to play through all the matches. Now that I think about it I am actually wishing for longer time limits.

[reddawn]

When we practice for 75-90 minute tournament time limits, every one of us ends up with a one-dimensional beatdown deck. Not because that's the only way to play the game, but because of the time limit.

I think that's a serious over-exaggeration.  75-90 minutes is plenty of time for a more defensive, control-oriented opening if you are familiar with your book (which you should be in a tournament situation, it's pretty similar to piloting decks in other games).  MTG has a far more established tournament scene, and you can still get DQ-ed for taking too long or drawing out the game, but control decks have no problem winning pro tours. 

Just because the objective is to kill the opposing Mage/Player doesn't mean control book somehow loose out; properly piloted and constructed, they have more than enough ability to kill the opposing mage.  I've played aggro vs control in MW enough times to see that there is always a point in which aggro needs to finish off the opponent, but if it doesn't and you are playing against a competent control player, you will be overwhelmed and die very soon after that point.

[piousflea]

I think that's a serious over-exaggeration.  75-90 minutes is plenty of time for a more defensive, control-oriented opening if you are familiar with your book (which you should be in a tournament situation, it's pretty similar to piloting decks in other games).  MTG has a far more established tournament scene, and you can still get DQ-ed for taking too long or drawing out the game, but control decks have no problem winning pro tours. 

Just because the objective is to kill the opposing Mage/Player doesn't mean control book somehow loose out; properly piloted and constructed, they have more than enough ability to kill the opposing mage.  I've played aggro vs control in MW enough times to see that there is always a point in which aggro needs to finish off the opponent, but if it doesn't and you are playing against a competent control player, you will be overwhelmed and die very soon after that point.

M:TG is not relevant, as the pace of MW is completely different from M:TG.

During Origins, I played a highly aggressive deck. The only piece of channeling I had in my entire deck was a battleforge. Yet I managed to run up against the 75 minute limit twice, both times defeating my opponent after the timer rung.

Here's the thing: in both games I was down a bunch of health and creatures early on, but I switched to a more defensive/evasive playstyle. Despite not having a defensively-built deck, I turned the corner and won both games. Skilled players are more than capable of making a comeback despite being down in channeling/health/creatures/etc, but it takes a whole bunch of rounds to do so. In both game my opponents were good sports and avoided any intentional slow play. All it would have taken to turn 2 of my wins into draws are a little more hemming and hawing during the preparation phase, and taking a little longer to figure out which creature to activate.

And this is with super-aggressive aggro build vs. super-aggressive aggro build.

There is an immense amount of positional play in high-level MW, and such play tends to draw out the game as both players jockey to get their mages/creatures in the right zones instead of going straight in.

[reddawn]

I think that's a serious over-exaggeration.  75-90 minutes is plenty of time for a more defensive, control-oriented opening if you are familiar with your book (which you should be in a tournament situation, it's pretty similar to piloting decks in other games).  MTG has a far more established tournament scene, and you can still get DQ-ed for taking too long or drawing out the game, but control decks have no problem winning pro tours. 

Just because the objective is to kill the opposing Mage/Player doesn't mean control book somehow loose out; properly piloted and constructed, they have more than enough ability to kill the opposing mage.  I've played aggro vs control in MW enough times to see that there is always a point in which aggro needs to finish off the opponent, but if it doesn't and you are playing against a competent control player, you will be overwhelmed and die very soon after that point.

M:TG is not relevant, as the pace of MW is completely different from M:TG.

During Origins, I played a highly aggressive deck. The only piece of channeling I had in my entire deck was a battleforge. Yet I managed to run up against the 75 minute limit twice, both times defeating my opponent after the timer rung.

Here's the thing: in both games I was down a bunch of health and creatures early on, but I switched to a more defensive/evasive playstyle. Despite not having a defensively-built deck, I turned the corner and won both games. Skilled players are more than capable of making a comeback despite being down in channeling/health/creatures/etc, but it takes a whole bunch of rounds to do so. In both game my opponents were good sports and avoided any intentional slow play. All it would have taken to turn 2 of my wins into draws are a little more hemming and hawing during the preparation phase, and taking a little longer to figure out which creature to activate.

And this is with super-aggressive aggro build vs. super-aggressive aggro build.

There is an immense amount of positional play in high-level MW, and such play tends to draw out the game as both players jockey to get their mages/creatures in the right zones instead of going straight in.

Aggro vs. Aggro games in my experience rarely last an hour.  You were totally vague in terms of what you actually played during your games, so there's no real way for me to know what your definition of aggro is, but chances are pretty good that if you're playing Battleforge, you're not playing aggro. 

There is a little positioning "jockeying" at the beginning of the game, true, but it hardly warrants excessive play time, and if you're the decidedly more "aggro" book than your opponent, you're going to make the first move because it's in your best interest anyway.

My point wasn't to draw parallels to the pace of the games, it was to address the fact that at "pro-level play," which Origins was decidedly not (and such arguably doesn't exist except perhaps among playtesters), 75-90 minute time restrictions should not inhibit players that are interested in completing the objective of the game and experienced pilots of their books. 

[DrMark]

If anyone's interested, here's the deck I won the tournament with:

Equipment (Total: 30)
1 x Dragonscale Haubert (1)
1 x Demonhide Armor (2)
2 x Lash of Hellfire (4)
2 x Mage Wand (4)
1 x Gautlets of Strength (2)
1 x Helm of Fear (2)
1 x Regrowth Belt (2)
1 x Reflex Boots (4)
1 x Dancing Scimitar (4) 
1 x Fireshaper Ring (1)
1 x Elemental Cloak (2)
1 x Moonglow Amulet (2)

Creatures (Total: 7)
1 x Dark Pact Slayer (3)
1 x Goran, Werewolf Pet (4)

Enchantments (Total: 30)
1 x Bear Strength (2) 
1 x Rhino Hide (2)
2 x Falcon Precision (4) 
1 x Armor Ward (5)
1 x Moongoose Agility (2)
1 x Cheetah Speed (2)
1 x Vampirism (2)
2 x Death Link (4)
2 x Ghoul Rot (4)
1 x Nullify (2)
1 x Agony (1)

Incantations (Total: 29)
1 x Purify (3)
1 x Knockdown (2)
2 x Battle Fury (4)
1 x Purge Magic (6)
1 x Teleport (4)
2 x Dispel (4)
2 x Dissolve (4)
1 x Seeking Dispel (2)

Attack (Total: 8 )
1 x Firestorm (3)
1 x Flameblast (1)
2 x Fireball (4)

Conjurations (Total: 15)
1 x Idol of Pestilence (2)
1 x Enchanter's Ward (2)
1 x Pentagram (4)
1 x Battle Forge (3)
2 x Mana Crystal (4)


Almost immediately after the tournament was over, I made some changes to it based on what happened in the finals. It's a bit nastier now - I dropped the Pentagram, Dark pact slayer, and a couple other things to make room for Aldramech, tainted blood, mage bane, another battle forge, etc.

[Shad0w]

Pious and Red we are off topic you can start a new thread to debate the pro and cons of a time limit.

[Texan85]

Two draws doesn't seem very promising from a time standpoint, especially if matches are taking 3 hours (that seems totally excessive, honestly).  Is the intention for comp play to have a standard time limit or will it fluctuate?  This distinction is pretty important because time limits affect the viability of certain ways of playing the game, and thus balance.

And that's the $250k question.

[Texan85]

When we practice for 75-90 minute tournament time limits, every one of us ends up with a one-dimensional beatdown deck. Not because that's the only way to play the game, but because of the time limit.

I think that's a serious over-exaggeration.  75-90 minutes is plenty of time for a more defensive, control-oriented opening if you are familiar with your book (which you should be in a tournament situation, it's pretty similar to piloting decks in other games).  MTG has a far more established tournament scene, and you can still get DQ-ed for taking too long or drawing out the game, but control decks have no problem winning pro tours. 

Just because the objective is to kill the opposing Mage/Player doesn't mean control book somehow loose out; properly piloted and constructed, they have more than enough ability to kill the opposing mage.  I've played aggro vs control in MW enough times to see that there is always a point in which aggro needs to finish off the opponent, but if it doesn't and you are playing against a competent control player, you will be overwhelmed and die very soon after that point.

.

Mtg doesn't have you pick from your deck each turn, and there is no chess like movement component for each card with turn exchanges between both,

Apples /= oranges.

[rcone002]

Two draws doesn't seem very promising from a time standpoint, especially if matches are taking 3 hours (that seems totally excessive, honestly).  Is the intention for comp play to have a standard time limit or will it fluctuate?  This distinction is pretty important because time limits affect the viability of certain ways of playing the game, and thus balance.

Reddawn - the 3-hour match Mark alluded to was NOT a tournament game, but a casual game he played with a friend/fellow gamer. During the 8-person final tournament on Sunday at Dice Tower Convention in Orlando, the match time limit was 75 minutes. Mark (Warlock) basically steamrolled his first two opponents, then battled to a hard-fought draw in the final against Phil (Forcemaster). Some matches seemed predestined to go to time, such as Priestess (Robert (me) - Temple of Light + heavy Bim-Shalla build) v Priestess (Patrick - Temple of Asyra, clerics, power-up to fatties build). In my opinion, I believe another 15 minutes would have resulted in match wins for the majority of matches that ended in draws, and I know that the folks at Arcane Wonders are continuing to tweak the numbers based on feedback from players and tournament data.

We'll see if things get better at Gen Con!!!

[Shad0w]

rcone002 your first five post need to be approved before they can be seen.I fixed the double post for you.

[DrMark]

"the 3-hour match Mark alluded to was NOT a tournament game, but a casual game he played with a friend/fellow gamer. " -- that's not correct. The three hour game I played against Graham was my second match during the Tuesday pre-lims. (Both Graham and I had won our first match that day). The 75 minute time-limit was imposed later in the week, I think.