FiF and the Bloodwave Warlord

[jacksmack]

Ballista will be released in FiF :D:D:D:D:D

[ringkichard]

Playtesters test promos. Arcane Wonders has said that all promos will be released, but there has been no official statement made about when Balista will be published for tournament play.

[Arlemus]

Oh, sorry if I was unclear.  I mean to say that I think (unlike some people that post on here) that the Warlord is entirely viable.  That is, no other mage could play his book better and with practice, he can be just as viable as any other mage.

He is not unplayable but most players in my gaming group consider him outclassed without realistic access to enchantment removal, teleportation, and nullify.

Example: A warlock places a ghoul rot, poison blood, enfeeble, and magebane on your warlord. You lose. Triple arcane means that you do not have the tools to counter that kind of enchantment assault. Even if the warlord places a cheetah speed or regeneration or whatever the warlock can win in that exchange of enchantment removal and replacement.

Well, depending on how that situation actually went down, I don't think automatic loss would the be the outcome.  You can purify off both ghoul rot and poison blood, and if you did them both together you'd actually be on top for actions.  Run 2 if you're scared, they don't cost triple.  You can counter enfeeble with cheetah speed, like you said.  There's no hard counter to magebane but a sunfire amulet would probably work pretty well.  I just don't see the Warlord automatically losing in that situation since purify exists.  Even if you run 2 dispel in addition to the other counters, just in case, that's only 2 points over what others pay, hardly unrealistic access.

[sIKE]

Well, depending on how that situation actually went down, I don't think automatic loss would the be the outcome.  You can purify off both ghoul rot and poison blood, and if you did them both together you'd actually be on top for actions.  Run 2 if you're scared, they don't cost triple.  You can counter enfeeble with cheetah speed, like you said.  There's no hard counter to magebane but a sunfire amulet would probably work pretty well.  I just don't see the Warlord automatically losing in that situation since purify exists.  Even if you run 2 dispel in addition to the other counters, just in case, that's only 2 points over what others pay, hardly unrealistic access.

In a vacuum most of this is true, but the rules and current card set currently favor other mages in such a manner that Warlord has very little chance to win in a tournament setting and even in casual play he is pretty had to win with. I think that FiF will help this a bit though.

[reddawn]

Well, depending on how that situation actually went down, I don't think automatic loss would the be the outcome.  You can purify off both ghoul rot and poison blood, and if you did them both together you'd actually be on top for actions.  Run 2 if you're scared, they don't cost triple.  You can counter enfeeble with cheetah speed, like you said.  There's no hard counter to magebane but a sunfire amulet would probably work pretty well.  I just don't see the Warlord automatically losing in that situation since purify exists.  Even if you run 2 dispel in addition to the other counters, just in case, that's only 2 points over what others pay, hardly unrealistic access.

In a vacuum most of this is true, but the rules and current card set currently favor other mages in such a manner that Warlord has very little chance to win in a tournament setting and even in casual play he is pretty had to win with. I think that FiF will help this a bit though.

Maybe you could clarify which cards you mean in the current card set and rules specifically favor mages who aren't the Warlord?  I get that seeing the Warlord in a positive light isn't a popular stance in these forums, but after playing with and against the Warlord a lot, I find gross generalizations like this hard to believe.

[sIKE]

Well, depending on how that situation actually went down, I don't think automatic loss would the be the outcome.  You can purify off both ghoul rot and poison blood, and if you did them both together you'd actually be on top for actions.  Run 2 if you're scared, they don't cost triple.  You can counter enfeeble with cheetah speed, like you said.  There's no hard counter to magebane but a sunfire amulet would probably work pretty well.  I just don't see the Warlord automatically losing in that situation since purify exists.  Even if you run 2 dispel in addition to the other counters, just in case, that's only 2 points over what others pay, hardly unrealistic access.

In a vacuum most of this is true, but the rules and current card set currently favor other mages in such a manner that Warlord has very little chance to win in a tournament setting and even in casual play he is pretty had to win with. I think that FiF will help this a bit though.

Maybe you could clarify which cards you mean in the current card set and rules specifically favor mages who aren't the Warlord?  I get that seeing the Warlord in a positive light isn't a popular stance in these forums, but after playing with and against the Warlord a lot, I find gross generalizations like this hard to believe.

This is very simple build you two copies of whatever Warlord book you like. Take the second copy and replace the mage with an Earth Wizard, remove any mage only cards (9 potentials), fill in any additional spells you would like to add with the additional spellpoints and duke it out.

Let us know who wins that battle. Not trying to be rude or mean, but if you need/want cold hard proof that is the best way I can think of the provide it to you.

[Arlemus]

Well, depending on how that situation actually went down, I don't think automatic loss would the be the outcome.  You can purify off both ghoul rot and poison blood, and if you did them both together you'd actually be on top for actions.  Run 2 if you're scared, they don't cost triple.  You can counter enfeeble with cheetah speed, like you said.  There's no hard counter to magebane but a sunfire amulet would probably work pretty well.  I just don't see the Warlord automatically losing in that situation since purify exists.  Even if you run 2 dispel in addition to the other counters, just in case, that's only 2 points over what others pay, hardly unrealistic access.

In a vacuum most of this is true, but the rules and current card set currently favor other mages in such a manner that Warlord has very little chance to win in a tournament setting and even in casual play he is pretty had to win with. I think that FiF will help this a bit though.

Maybe you could clarify which cards you mean in the current card set and rules specifically favor mages who aren't the Warlord?  I get that seeing the Warlord in a positive light isn't a popular stance in these forums, but after playing with and against the Warlord a lot, I find gross generalizations like this hard to believe.

This is very simple build you two copies of whatever Warlord book you like. Take the second copy and replace the mage with an Earth Wizard, remove any mage only cards (9 potentials), fill in any additional spells you would like to add with the additional spellpoints and duke it out.

Let us know who wins that battle. Not trying to be rude or mean, but if you need/want cold hard proof that is the best way I can think of the provide it to you.

That's just another roundabout way to call the warlord bad and not have to explain.  It's also a complete overexaggeration considering its not even possible do such a thing without taking out more than just mage only cards.  You would have to take out all war school creatures, etc, that now cost double for the wizard, or take a massive spellbook penatly.  The biggest argument against the warlord is based in spellbook cost so saying the wizard can take a much more substantial hit then the mild one the warlors takes in arcane, but for war, makes literally no sense.

[reddawn]

Well, depending on how that situation actually went down, I don't think automatic loss would the be the outcome.  You can purify off both ghoul rot and poison blood, and if you did them both together you'd actually be on top for actions.  Run 2 if you're scared, they don't cost triple.  You can counter enfeeble with cheetah speed, like you said.  There's no hard counter to magebane but a sunfire amulet would probably work pretty well.  I just don't see the Warlord automatically losing in that situation since purify exists.  Even if you run 2 dispel in addition to the other counters, just in case, that's only 2 points over what others pay, hardly unrealistic access.

In a vacuum most of this is true, but the rules and current card set currently favor other mages in such a manner that Warlord has very little chance to win in a tournament setting and even in casual play he is pretty had to win with. I think that FiF will help this a bit though.

Maybe you could clarify which cards you mean in the current card set and rules specifically favor mages who aren't the Warlord?  I get that seeing the Warlord in a positive light isn't a popular stance in these forums, but after playing with and against the Warlord a lot, I find gross generalizations like this hard to believe.

This is very simple build you two copies of whatever Warlord book you like. Take the second copy and replace the mage with an Earth Wizard, remove any mage only cards (9 potentials), fill in any additional spells you would like to add with the additional spellpoints and duke it out.

Let us know who wins that battle. Not trying to be rude or mean, but if you need/want cold hard proof that is the best way I can think of the provide it to you.

Apparently it's not "very simple," otherwise you'd just tell me the specific cards and rules you're talking about.  You wouldn't have to worry about being rude or mean if you just answered my question.  I'm pretty sure I play MW regularly enough to be confident in my ability to question someone who makes blanket statements.

I disagree with the attitude that the Warlord sucks whenever he has plenty of good tools and I've seen him be effective.  He has good equipment, one of the better spawnpoints since it doesn't require almost any work to get 2 channeling (at least), and with Meditation Amulet he can pretty much continually summon and buff his creatures all while making extra mana.  The newer Skeletons also give him some good options if a player is worried about Sleep or other psychic-based control cards, and Acid Ball keeps his efficient creatures relevant.

I don't think the Warlord was good at the time of his release, but the same went for pretty much any mage that required lots of creatures to function properly.  There weren't enough ways to attack Armor such that level 1-2 creatures really had a chance once the Armor values got high enough (2 or higher).

I guess that means someone has to own the expansions to really make creature-heavy mages like the Warlord viable, but that's really not a big deal considering how good DvN is.  The Beastmasters had an easier time with it  since they had Tooth and Nail, but paying 14 to counter 2 armor is obviously worse than paying 5.   

[Aylin]

Basic auto-includes:
3x Dispel
3x Dissolve
2x Teleport

A Warlord pays an extra 7 over other mages (like Beastmater, Necromancer, Priestess, etc).

Barracks is currently the WORST spawnpoint in the entire game, as the only way to increase it's base channeling is to play more Outposts, except neither Garrison Post nor Archer's Watchtower have any synergy with Barracks.

On top of that, War creatures are, in general, weak compared to other creatures of the same level from different schools. Why do you think so many Warlord books use Skeletons only? Or the Holy soldiers? Except for Thorg and Dwarf Panzerguarde, none of the War creatures are that great.

Veteran Tokens work best against someone playing Swarm...and right now no one plays Swarm. In most games you're lucky to get 2, with 0 or 1 much more likely.

All of the best War school  spells are level 1...with a good chunk of them being Novice. You'll notice Druids are only sad to pay 3x cost for Battle Fury and Charge...


Summary:
The War school is weak
One of the Warlord's major powers is nearly useless
Warlord pays more to include basic spells than anyone else, on top of having a weak school


THAT is why Warlord is weak. Can you still win games with the Warlord? Yes; skill plays an important part. That doesn't make the Warlord not terrible.

[sIKE]

And the best creature in Warlord book other than Thorg (who cant Taunt a mage) is the Iron Golem who is Earth and would probably replace Thorg in the Wizards book.

The reason the Wizard wins is he can carry many Dispels, Wands, and Teleports. The Warlord, as he is today, is very likely to die a pit style death due to these factors.

The reason I refuse to provide anything is because after playing Charmyna about 20 games against his Wizards I never came close to winning a game and really have nothing worthwhile to post. Now my play skill is not up to his level, but it doesn't take long playing the Warlord vs. Earth Wizard to see that the best parts of War/Earth sections of the FvM set are played better by the Wizard.

I am sorry to disappoint, but I really really liked the Warlord, but he just ended up being beat. Now against other mages he may have a better chance at a win. As previously mentioned not so much with Curse decks that do DoT, agro rush decks (a well played FM literally Ginsu's the guy in like 5 rounds).

[Kharhaz]

Ballista will be released in FiF :D:D:D:D:D

First, That example was a reference to an organized playkit book I ran, not a playtest book. Anyone can do that with the promos that are floating around the scene today.

Secondarily, I am not saying that the Warlord cannot win, but in a side by side comparison, I think he has more uphill battles than some other archetypes. Harder choices during construction and has less overall flexibility. That has nothing outright to do with his win - loss %; A lot of varying factors like both players skill, decisions made in any given game, and the randomness nature of dice.

[reddawn]

1. Basic auto-includes:
3x Dispel
3x Dissolve
2x Teleport

A Warlord pays an extra 7 over other mages (like Beastmater, Necromancer, Priestess, etc).

2. Barracks is currently the WORST spawnpoint in the entire game, as the only way to increase it's base channeling is to play more Outposts, except neither Garrison Post nor Archer's Watchtower have any synergy with Barracks.

3. On top of that, War creatures are, in general, weak compared to other creatures of the same level from different schools. Why do you think so many Warlord books use Skeletons only? Or the Holy soldiers? Except for Thorg and Dwarf Panzerguarde, none of the War creatures are that great.

4. Veteran Tokens work best against someone playing Swarm...and right now no one plays Swarm. In most games you're lucky to get 2, with 0 or 1 much more likely.

5. All of the best War school  spells are level 1...with a good chunk of them being Novice. You'll notice Druids are only sad to pay 3x cost for Battle Fury and Charge...


Summary:
The War school is weak
One of the Warlord's major powers is nearly useless
Warlord pays more to include basic spells than anyone else, on top of having a weak school


THAT is why Warlord is weak. Can you still win games with the Warlord? Yes; skill plays an important part. That doesn't make the Warlord not terrible.

1. Why do you need so many copies of these?  There are multiple ways of solving problem enchantments other than removing them and I don't know why you would ever need 3 Dissolves when Acid Ball deals with the most problematic equip--Armor (Warlord doesn't pay 3x for them anyway, so it hardly matters).  1 Dispel sure, maybe 2 if you're paranoid, but 3 is overkill.  The Warlord only needs to pay 2 more points for those Dispels at that point.

Teleport is a good card, but it's also very expensive mana-wise.  Charge can accomplish much of the same for less and give the target and extra die. 

2.  Other than the fact that it makes more mana if you play it, and for cheaper than a Mana Crystal/Flower?  Or, you can play one and cast a soldier 1 zone away...and still make more mana.  Most other Spawnpoints require the player to fulfill some sort of condition that requires regular actions; the Barracks does not, and the outposts serve another function should you need it.  Your definition of synergy is obviously pretty limited.

3.  "So many Warlords?"  That looks like an exaggeration if I've ever seen one.  I doubt enough people even play the game, much less the Warlord, to make an assumption like that.

I've helped build Warlord books that included skeletons or holy creatures, and after testing came to the conclusion that the Warlord doesn't need point-expensive situational creatures like Knights or S. Minions.  Butchers and Slingers, like Timber Wolves for Beastmasters, meet most of the Warlord's needs.  Trolls are there if you need fatter guys; they aren't as vulnerable to Sleep as Westlock Knights and require less support to survive than do Skeletal Knights.

Also, you can't do 1:1 comparisons of creatures based just on level.  There are a bunch of creatures that are the same level but that's where the similarities end.  Other than abilities, Cost is a big motivator to consider less expensive, same level creatures over more expensive ones.

4.  What do you mean "no one plays swarm"?  Playing with lots of creatures happens to be very good right now with Acid Ball and Meditation Amulet.  Not everyone plays the way you do or in the environment that you do.

And yeah, some games Veteran isn't relevant, that's true.  The Warlord's abilities also cost nothing (because you should be using the Ring of Command) and require virtually no work.  A mage isn't defined solely by abilities either; there are mage-specific or easy-access cards that help him or her out too.

5.  Well, the novice War incantations are good cheap options but they're hardly "the best."  It's not just about paying spellbook points for something; the Warlord's helm lets him cast/change those cards on the cheap without actually expending them, which is a fact that many anti-warlord posters here apparently overlook.  Power Strike/etc every turn if you need it plus another creature or extra mana is pretty good in my experience, and lets him use the extra spellbook slots he saves for other cards.  Like that extra Dispel or Teleport you need so badly.


@sIKE: Has Charmyna even been on the forums or OCTGN in over a couple months?  I mean, I played against his cheesy Wizard build before (got stomped the first time) and after 2 hours (the second time) had no damage on my Warlock and 10+ damage on his Wizard.  This was before Armor had good answers though, so I can see how creature-reliant mages would struggle.

Charm obviously knew what he was doing with the Wizard and I can't imagine playing 20 games against someone's best mage when you're trying the Warlord out is really going to get you anywhere.  Looks to me more like a bad experience learning how to play a mage than evidence that said mage somehow sucks.

[silverclawgrizzly]

Guys don't you all know Wizards are all unbeatable super Mages and everything is is for newbs and losers? I assure you this debate has been made 1,000 times. As we all know, there's only one way to play this game competitively after all! I can't for the life of me imagine why anyone would ever want to play anything other than a Wizard.

When I first joined the forums I got the same crap about the Beast Master as we're hearing about the Warlord in this thread. Oh he's useless! Oh he's not competitive! Oh nobody uses swarm and that's the only way to ever play him! I disagreed, got told I was a newb and I'd learn better. I did learn, I learned how to add people to my Ignore List Though I'm still waiting for whatever evidence I was suppose to find that the Wizard is the end all be all and how my favorite mage is crap I would heartily recommend the use of the Ignore List on certain members.

Go up to your Profile at the top, Click on Buddies/Ignore List under Modify Profile, and save yourself some grief.

[Zuberi]

I believe the Warlord does have a lot of issues. I don't think he is unplayable, but he is at a severe disadvantage currently. The fact that you can give his book over to a Wizard and have spellpoints to spare is a very disconcerting issue which DOES happen.

Presumably if the Warlord spent at least 40 points in War School Spells, the Wizard would end up over budget when you switched them out. However, the Warlord might not actually invest that heavily into his trained school and many of those War Spells will be Novice so that they don't actually tax the Wizard when you switch. Once you take out the Warlord Only cards and receive the discount on Arcane Spells (because the Warlord is one of very few mages who you can expect will dip into his Weak School) then you end up with the absurd reality that the Wizard will actually have points to spare and can turn it into a bigger and more versatile book.

From the cards we've seen thus far from Forged in Fire though I think the Warlord will be considerably better.

[Sailor Vulcan]

I haven't seen charmyna online in quite a while, but he has a knack for making the most of his cards and abilities. However, I think I thought of a really good way to test the Bloodwave Warlord's competitiveness/viability after FiF is released:

1. After FiF is released, have Charmyna build a new Earth Wizard book and test it until he thinks he's perfected it, WITHOUT posting it on the forums or showing it murphy. Have murphy do the same, but with a Bloodwave Warlord, and not post it on the forums or show it to Charmyna. (murphy doesn't have a forum account, so that should be simple enough)
2. Have them duke it out with their new spellbooks, while the rest of us watch.
3. Have all of the spectators to their game loosely estimate how even or uneven the game was, then figure out how much that was due to skill level and how much to the power levels of their mages.


I think that if it's a close fight, and if murphy's and charmyna's skill levels are relatively equal, then that would be strong evidence of FiF making the Bloodwave warlord competitive.