Thoughts on attacking

[gw]

Thoughts on attacking - triggered by the question why I dislike Chitin armor so much

I can fully appreciate the joy and aestethics of a nice builder strategy - a healthy, benevolent set-up,  not meddling with the opponent's affairs and simply waiting for him to realize how futile his attempts are and then accept his resignation - a gentleman's way of winning.
I like to kill quickly, I like to harass my opponent, I like to mess up his plans, I like to focus my damage on the mage, I prefer attacking to defending - and that's why I love to play aggrssive styles.

What I would like this thread to be is a place for aggressive players to share thoughts about openings, attacking ideas or general thoughts on that topic.

At the current state of the game I think attacking is an uphill battle but I also think that this is how it should be - it just shouldn't be too steep.
Just my thoughts and experiences on that matter :


1. Opening situation : Attacker vs Builder

I refer to turns 1 to 3 or 4 as the opening phase of the game.
It takes about 3 to 4 turns to establish relevant contact with your opponent.
An aggressive player needs that much time to close-in and develop a serious threat.
A defensive builder must reckon with a aggressive player and therefore must be ready to defend appropiately.

Opening situation when an attacker meets a builder around turn 3/4 :

Attacker :
- has a creature (probably better and more expensive than the builder)
- invested probably at least one action into a double-movement to close-in quickly and save mana.
- 1-2 minor support spells, e.g. one hidden enchantment

Builder:
- has a creature (probably defensive-ish in nature; a good guard or all-rounder)
- invested all actions into infrastructure and has at least 1 spawnpoint (additional channeling + action)

The necessity to spend time closing-in and less infrastructure based spells are the reason why aggressive play will have a growing disadvantage the longer the game goes - but that's deal:
You either kill quickly or you don't kill at all.
 

2. Midgame

This is where an aggressive spellbook wants to decide the game and kill. Shouldn't last longer than turn 10.
That's where things get tricky - really tricky. Margin of error is quite small here.
So, what does an attacker has to deal with ?

----- 1st defensive measure : Guards
In general my impression is that it is easy for an attacker to efficiently deal with defending creatures. There are many ways to get rid of guards. Nevertheless it is important to note that dealing with guards cost actions and mana and must be done - it is a necessity.

----- 2nd defensive measure : Damage reduction, defense and healing

In order to deal the required 30+ damage to the opponent mage, one also has to break through the mage's defense, too.
This is where I think that the game probably tips out of balance towards the defender (and where "Chitin Armor" (promo) would have a negative impact).
why is that ?

First, let's look at the raw numbers of different stacking slots and possibilites (permanents, one-off heals excluded)

Core (that is what you can expect from any deck; probably with multiple copies):
Armor +2
Gloves +1
Boots +1
Breeches +1
Belt anti-crit dmg
Cloak +1
Enchantment +2
Regeneration +2 heal/turn

-> sums up to 8 armor, 2 regen/turn and crit dmg conversion
All are very cheap and cost 6 or less mana !

Additional possibilites:
Aegis -1 dice
Defense equipment
Defense enchantment


Second, let's look how aggressive decks can deal with that :

a) Ignore the armor. Direct damage curses like [mwcard=MW1E24]Magebane[/mwcard], [mwcard=MW1E19]Ghoul Rot[/mwcard] and conditions like Tainted, Burn.
Very good but limited in availability.

or

b) Deal with the armor. And here is where the game might tip too much out of balance.

+++ Pierce : some creatures and weapons have pierce but usually only 1 maybe 2 and that simply is not relevant.

+++ Destroy the armor : This doesn't work. A defender will always be able to outequip you at the moment. Why?

1. Thanks to his infrastructure he has an action and mana advantage, which he all can invest into getting up his defense. The attacker has to save actions for attack and is left with usually 1 quickcast or maybe -if he chooses to not attack- with a 2nd spell (but he doesn't attack then !)

Attacker : 1-2 actions to deal with defense
Defender : spawnpoint action (new guarding creature or equip) + 2 actions to equip defense.

2. "The hidden enchantment"-problem
Your opponent has an armor that you would like to [mwcard=MW1I07]Dissolve[/mwcard] and a hidden enchantment on him. This definitely has to be expected to be a [mwcard=MW1E29]Nullify[/mwcard], which means you either can take the risk to waste most of your turn's mana and your only action to do nothing but get countered or you invest even more actions (which you don't really have) or you wait and accept that the armor stays.
The problem is more complex because it could also be [mwcard=MW1E36]Rhino Hide[/mwcard] or [mwcard=MW1E32]Regrowth[/mwcard].
Which card do you prepare ? Worst case is you decide it's a Nullify, but then it is a Rhino or Regen. So instead of +2 Armor your opponent suddenly has +4 or regenerates next turn = gg

3. Armor comes from different card types (related to Nr.2).
The action advantage and various different card type armor sources (enchantment or equipment or condition marker) mean that spells used to attack must do more than simply remove armor - they must make up for the action disadvantage and be flexible.
-> I think we need a spell that removes armor no matter if coming from an enchantment or artifact (aka Corrode or Rust).


+++ Reduce the armor : What do we have ?
[mwcard=MWSTX2FFE07]Rust[/mwcard] -2
Corrode condition (relevant sources [mwcard=DNA01]Acid Ball[/mwcard] and [mwcard=DNC03]Devouring Jelly[/mwcard] because they also do more than just removing armor. They deal damage and remove armor regardless of source.)

That's it.
...
...
...

-2 (!) and maybe some corrodes vs. +8 and additional effects.
Having an armor that has -3 Acid (source of corrodes) is problematic at the moment (Chitin Armor promo) in my opinion.


Note that we haven't even dealt with the threat of Healing and Defenses.
As an attacker you have to have answers to both, which usually are reduced to [mwcard=MW1E31]Poisoned Blood[/mwcard], [mwcard=MW1J19]Deathlock[/mwcard] and [mwcard=FWE03]Falcon Precision[/mwcard]. I think these options are sufficient though but one must be aware of the timing and prevent healing early.
In my opinion even though this also is "just another thing one has to deal with" I don't have the impression it's a problem.

----- 3rd defensive measure : Run away.
Straightforward. Problem is it also costs actions to follow / get to him but ok.


->
Conclusion on the armor topic : There are not enough efficient anti-armor concepts/spells around. The only 2 relevant concepts are Rust (can be played any time, works against armor from any source) and Corrode (armor must already be present, works against armor from any source).

Note that some Mages have innate defensive abilities that are very useful for defense :
Wizard : ignore 3 dmg each turn
Priestess : immune to conditions (corrode)
Dwarf : difficult to get rid of his equipment


3. Endgame

This is the "Here be dragons" unknown realm.
It shouldn't be relevant for an aggressive player. This is where [mwcard=MW1Q19]Mage Wand[/mwcard] rules or weird 20+ mana creatures amass.
This is where Keynes' "In the long run...." scenarios are part of the discussion about the outcome of a game; e.g. "In the long run I win because I have an eternal servant
 [mwcard=DNC19]Venomous Zombie[/mwcard] that inflicts unlimited Tainted markers over time and cannot be killed  (if my  [mwcard=MW1Q19]Mage Wand[/mwcard] with [mcard=MWSTX1CKI01]Drain Soul[/mwcard] isn't enough)."
You spellbook and strategy has nothing to do with this phase of the game.


4. The nature of an aggressive spellbook

You need a solution for every situation. You need the best solution for every situation.
It doesn't matter how much spellbook points the spells cost. In the end if your spellbook only has 30 cards it doesn't matter - the game lasts less than 10 turns anyway. If it doesn't you probably already lost.

Thx for reading.

[Schwenkgott]

That is what i've been telling - no yelling for the last 6 months. There has to be a way to deal with several Armor-Equipments at once or at least punish for their possession ... or easier way to remove/disable them for other schools. Be sure that there are several proposals made in the Playtester Forum

[Mystery]

Thoughts on attacking

I can fully appreciate the joy and aestethics of a nice builder strategy - a healthy, benevolent set-up,  not meddling with the opponent's affairs and simply waiting for him to realize how futile his attempts are and then accept his resignation - a gentleman's way of winning.
I like to kill quickly, I like to harass my opponent, I like to mess up his plans, I like to focus my damage on the mage, I prefer attacking to defending - and that's why I love to play aggrssive styles.

What I would like this thread to be is a place for aggressive players to share thoughts about openings, attacking ideas or general thoughts on that topic.

At the current state of the game I think attacking is an uphill battle but I also think that this is how it should be - it just shouldn't be too steep.
Just my thoughts and experiences on that matter :

The point is mage wars is not risk you can play it like it but it is not, it is deeper, its more like runewars, starcraft board game and others, its just much more complex and others. It is also curcial to read the oponents ideas and books. I agree that currently real well developed armor up mage will succeed. But even charmynas wizard had a small weakness of lacking killing power in the end. So if you would have the perfect deck it might work, (if you know in advance how to beat) all other mages have even more troubles carrying all that stuff

[/quote]

2. Midgame
----- 1st defensive measure : Guards
In general my impression is that it is easy for an attacker to efficiently deal with defending creatures. There are many ways to get rid of guards. Nevertheless it is important to note that dealing with guards cost actions and mana and must be done - it is a necessity.

but a tanglevine already takes out that action, and the point is if we talk about really defensive mages with lots of that high armor (in multiple copies) you just kill those guards (if you look at our game, just even on agression dont always focus on the mage

----- 2nd defensive measure : Damage reduction, defense and healing

In order to deal the required 30+ damage to the opponent mage, one also has to break through the mage's defense, too.
This is where I think that the game probably tips out of balance towards the defender (and where "Chitin Armor" (promo) would have a negative impact).
why is that ?

First, let's look at the raw numbers of different stacking slots and possibilites (permanents, one-off heals excluded)

Core (that is what you can expect from any deck; probably with multiple copies):
Armor +2
Gloves +1
Boots +1
Breeches +1
Belt anti-crit dmg
Cloak +1
Enchantment +2
Regeneration +2 heal/turn

-> sums up to 8 armor, 2 regen/turn and crit dmg conversion
All are very cheap and cost 6 or less mana !

Additional possibilites:
Aegis -1 dice
Defense equipment
Defense enchantment

There are tons of equipment yes, but acid ball is not the solution to equipment removal, it is an assistance, people in my feeling run far to many acid balls instead of dissolves, corrodes, potent players have counters to either, but dissolve at least gets rid of something, corrods maybe vanish to nowhere

a) Ignore the armor. Direct damage curses like [mwcard=MW1E24]Magebane[/mwcard], [mwcard=MW1E19]Ghoul Rot[/mwcard] and conditions like Tainted, Burn.
Very good but limited in availability.

Why limited in availability? why as dark mage not run 4 ghoul rots, 6 poisoned blood its 14 spellpoints, and all those armor also costs some spellpoints and help nothing against DOT.

b) Deal with the armor. And here is where the game might tip too much out of balance.

+++ Pierce : some creatures and weapons have pierce but usually only 1 maybe 2 and that simply is not relevant.

+++ Destroy the armor : This doesn't work. A defender will always be able to outequip you at the moment. Why?

1. Thanks to his infrastructure he has an action and mana advantage, which he all can invest into getting up his defense. The attacker has to save actions for attack and is left with usually 1 quickcast or maybe -if he chooses to not attack- with a 2nd spell (but he doesn't attack then !)

Attacker : 1-2 actions to deal with defense
Defender : spawnpoint action (new guarding creature or equip) + 2 actions to equip defense.

I agree with you that there is this action problem, the spawnpoint you can give yourself too, have a thoughspore with dispel (taking care of regrowth or rhino hide), fellela giving you bear strength...

But the point is even without spawnpoint you have this 1 vs 2 as you should also be attacking from time to time. We have those discussions on the playtesters and have some ideas to treat with it.

2. "The hidden enchantment"-problem
Your opponent has an armor that you would like to [mwcard=MW1I07]Dissolve[/mwcard] and a hidden enchantment on him. This definitely has to be expected to be a [mwcard=MW1E29]Nullify[/mwcard], which means you either can take the risk to waste most of your turn's mana and your only action to do nothing but get countered or you invest even more actions (which you don't really have) or you wait and accept that the armor stays.
The problem is more complex because it could also be [mwcard=MW1E36]Rhino Hide[/mwcard] or [mwcard=MW1E32]Regrowth[/mwcard].
Which card do you prepare ? Worst case is you decide it's a Nullify, but then it is a Rhino or Regen. So instead of +2 Armor your opponent suddenly has +4 or regenerates next turn = gg

Seeking dispel helps in either case you get rid of rhino/regen and could still decide to dissolve or not, or with academy you can one turn not attack and use the full action to garante the equipment destruction. And you talk about +2 armor/+4 armor, dont dissolve the chest piece as stated well prepared defensive mages have multiple copies. But do they have of leather equipment, it is important to read what you take. dont always take away the first thing, dispel bear strength on a druid grizzly, probably has it again multiple times, but on force master probably only a second, gauntlets of strength, destroy those tiny buffs, destroy the leather +1 not the dragonscale. Thats not always gonna make the game, but often helps much more

and first kill guards or infastructure, take deathlocks if you are agressive, take multiple PB

or buff yourself or do something else and crumble with the full action

3. Armor comes from different card types (related to Nr.2).
The action advantage and various different card type armor sources (enchantment or equipment or condition marker) mean that spells used to attack must do more than simply remove armor - they must make up for the action disadvantage and be flexible.
-> I think we need a spell that removes armor no matter if coming from an enchantment or artifact (aka Corrode or Rust).
+++ Reduce the armor : What do we have ?
[mwcard=MWSTX2FFE07]Rust[/mwcard] -2
Corrode condition (relevant sources [mwcard=DNA01]Acid Ball[/mwcard] and [mwcard=DNC03]Devouring Jelly[/mwcard] because they also do more than just removing armor. They deal damage and remove armor regardless of source.)
-2 (!) and maybe some corrodes vs. +8 and additional effects.
Having an armor that has -3 Acid (source of corrodes) is simply ridiculous at the moment (Chitin Armor promo) in my opinion.

DISSOLVE, CRUMBLE, dispel vs rhino hide, forget the acid as main source. And critical strike! and all types of piercing. chitin armor does nothing to that

Note that we haven't even dealt with the threat of Healing and Defenses.
As an attacker you have to have answers to both, which usually are reduced to [mwcard=MW1E31]Poisoned Blood[/mwcard], [mwcard=MW1J19]Deathlock[/mwcard] and [mwcard=FWE03]Falcon Precision[/mwcard]. I think these options are sufficient though but one must be aware of the timing and prevent healing early.
In my opinion even though this also is "just another thing one has to deal with" I don't have the impression it's a problem.

you dont have to run falcon precision its nice of course but you can also dissolve that item or dispel the cobra reflexes (hardly seen). On agression you need the cards to treat with it.

Conclusion on the armor topic : There are not enough efficient anti-armor concepts/spells around. The only 2 relevant concepts are Rust (can be played any time, works against armor from any source) and Corrode (armor must already be present, works against armor from any source).

Note that some Mages have innate defensive abilities that are very useful for defense :
Wizard : ignore 3 dmg each turn
Priestess : immune to conditions (corrode)
Dwarf : difficult to get rid of his equipment

corrode is not the only solution, what is hard about the dwarf? it simply costs you 1!!!!! mana more than the oponent. I mainly see the wizard with his spellbook size advantage to have an answer to everything, every other tanky/armor mage has some weakness, know it and you win.

4. The nature of an aggressive spellbook
You need a solution for every situation. You need the best solution for every situation.
It doesn't matter how much spellbook points the spells cost. In the end if your spellbook only has 30 cards it doesn't matter - the game lasts less than 10 turns anyway. If it doesn't you probably already lost.
Thx for reading.

Concluding remark from me the only issue i see is that armor is that it is a passive ability, while attacking is an "active ability":
 so if you dont create a action damage advantage (attacking creatures) and use your mage for melee, the defender will win as he can dispel your bear strength cast a new rhino hide, while you rust him and cant also dispel the regrowth as you want to melee.

Lastly as an agression mage you want to end early so play errors matter more in my perspective.

[Mystery]

That is what i've been telling - no yelling for the last 6 months. There has to be a way to deal with several Armor-Equipments at once or at least punish for their possession ... or easier way to remove/disable them for other schools. Be sure that there are several proposals made in the Playtester Forum

yeah removal for other schools and the same also for enchantments, and maybe with limited use not making the dissolve obsolete, but having something (of war  ) treating with armor, something with weapons...

[Coshade]

Awesome reply GW!

I really enjoyed reading your analysis and the helpful responses! This was really insightful. Also everyone that replied has some very interesting insights.

Thanks!

[arxiducs]

Thanks for the topic and discussion. It is really interesting.
I have been thinking for a while that I would like to see more ways to build +piercing in the game. Two main ways come to mind:
1) evidently, more cards that improve the +piercing:
-equipment for the mage: not necessarily the weapon, something a long the lines of "gloves-of-battle-skill-for-piercing", etc.
-enchantments that can buff +piercing permanently until dispelled (to balance this, you may use dissipate-type of enchantments)
2) the second way is related to game mechanics: What if (any or certain) creatures could gain +X piercing by spending an action prior to the attack with the piercing trait? I haven´t really thought too deeply about the impact of this in the game, but it could probably make more interesting the movement mechanics and guard mechanics of the game. This would put (even) more weight on creatures, but would favour skill over metagame (which is another skill, by the way ) and definitely makes thematic sense (take time to find the hole in your foe´s armor).

Just dropping here some ideas for discussion, and to see if someone takes them up and maybe puts them in the right forum (if not already there).

Take care, guys.

[Mystery]

on the first point: lets start building decks with wolf fury and critical strike.

or use dark pact slayer with either, use brogan, also grizzly with one of the above also gets already some piercing, and the warlock vs priestess helmet gives warlocks 1 piercing to all attacks.

the problem i had till now, that people complain about the strong armor builds, but i hardly really see any where i had troubles with and was in the need of pierce, so i dont included it yet, once more people do really use the high armors on a strong bases (i mean having 2 rhino hide, both leather equips and 2 pieces of chest is not high armor, just dissolve, disple and no problem and need for pierce), we will finally use that pierce. I at least have hardly used all the available piercing untill now.

[arxiducs]

In my opinion, the more variation in PLAY we can get, the better. The point is not about the "need", but about the "fun".
I personally do not play much with piercing because it is very static to date, if we would add yet another option to PLAY and read the opponent and enjoy tactics, etc. That will make the game more fun.

[wtcannonjr]

I really appreciate the analysis and thought that went in to this discussion.

The one limit I see to the analysis is that it compares just one strategy  (aggressive) with one strategy designed to counter the aggressive strategy. I.e. a heavy armor - defense strategy (HAD).  It then concludes more spells are needed so that aggresive strategies can defeat the HAD counter strategy. Another set of options are available for players to consider. Rather than request new spells so that an Aggressive strategy can always counter an effective counter-strategy we could explore new strategies that counter heavy armor - defense strategies that use the current card pool.

I think some of these have been mentioned on the forums here but may not have been framed specifically to address this situation. For example, the Johktari Beastmaster's ability to focus down on creatures first could be augmented with some conjuration killing spells to effectively remove all the advantages the HAD strategy uses. In this way you have countered the HAD mage and he/she is left with a lot of armor but no ability to continue the fight.

[Mystery]

Following is my interpretation of comparison

I say creatures win over DOT
High armor wins against creatures and defenitly quite aggresive ones
but DOT has only quite good chances against high armor tank if played right

its a not perfectly symmetric paper stone scissors

The only thing is that it still comes back to that independent of what you pay the wizard he always increases the win chance of either side he takes in the above triangle.

of course for example necro increases the side against DOT, etc also