The last 1/4th of a game match ...

[KissBlade]

Often feels like it's a bit of grinding down on a beaten opponent.  Unlike traditional boardgames or CCG's, my biggest issue with getting people to stick with Mage Wars is, it seems to "lead with your best".  Your first 5-6 turns feel really epic because you got the wind up and the pitch.  The last three turns on the other hand ... not so much.  Aside from very close matches, most of the time, the last few turns feel like busy work to me.  This was especially so when I'm watching some of the competitive streams of OCTGN tourney matches, etc.  Often, halfway through, it's fairly predictable who's going to win and it's literally the next thirty minutes is just going through the motions.  The only exceptions are when a player makes a MAJOR mistake (one that comes to mind is the Priestess match vs Necro where the Necro decided to charge with his unarmored mage despite having Deathlock + Idol opening).

Has anyone had similar experiences and if so, do you recommend having a concede threshold in Mage Wars?  One of the more recent matches I've watched for example was Sharkbait vs drmambo.
To me, I thought the game was over around this point:
https://youtu.be/fM9lhctsdug?t=2416
When drmambo missed the timing window on chant of rage to attempt to combo kill Alandell.  This effectively costed him a tempo hit of an entire turn and imo, it made it nearly impossible to come back from.  You'll notice, the game continues on for another hour and a half!  By the end, the Paladin unsurprisingly had zero damage taken while the Druid lost everything on the board.  If I put a new player through that, they'd drop the game so fast because who wants to just sit around while you roll dice for an hour one shotting their new summons as they run away?

[Puddnhead]

I hear you on this.  Some games just feel like the slow inexorable loss.  I think there's definitely a place for the honorable concession.  We do have to remember, though, that one main mechanic in this game is rolling dice.  Dice are a fickle mistress...there's always a chance that your Hurl Boulder rolls 14 crit damage or that your opponent's rolls 5 blanks.

In particular with the game you mention, I believe there were a few legitimate places where the Druid could have made a serious comeback.  Especially Druids have a lot of ways to come back from deficits like that.  Now, that does require some experience with the "hopeless" situation to know whether you are able to make the right plays or not.

[Sailor Vulcan]

Often feels like it's a bit of grinding down on a beaten opponent.  Unlike traditional boardgames or CCG's, my biggest issue with getting people to stick with Mage Wars is, it seems to "lead with your best".  Your first 5-6 turns feel really epic because you got the wind up and the pitch.  The last three turns on the other hand ... not so much.  Aside from very close matches, most of the time, the last few turns feel like busy work to me.  This was especially so when I'm watching some of the competitive streams of OCTGN tourney matches, etc.  Often, halfway through, it's fairly predictable who's going to win and it's literally the next thirty minutes is just going through the motions.  The only exceptions are when a player makes a MAJOR mistake (one that comes to mind is the Priestess match vs Necro where the Necro decided to charge with his unarmored mage despite having Deathlock + Idol opening).

Has anyone had similar experiences and if so, do you recommend having a concede threshold in Mage Wars?  One of the more recent matches I've watched for example was Sharkbait vs drmambo.
To me, I thought the game was over around this point:
https://youtu.be/fM9lhctsdug?t=2416
When drmambo missed the timing window on chant of rage to attempt to combo kill Alandell.  This effectively costed him a tempo hit of an entire turn and imo, it made it nearly impossible to come back from.  You'll notice, the game continues on for another hour and a half!  By the end, the Paladin unsurprisingly had zero damage taken while the Druid lost everything on the board.  If I put a new player through that, they'd drop the game so fast because who wants to just sit around while you roll dice for an hour one shotting their new summons as they run away?

^This. It happens quite a bit especially when testing new decks or against newer players. I've lost count of the number of times this has happened to me on octgn. Newer players have trouble telling when they are in an unwinnable situation. And unfortunately I have ADHD so if the game drags out like that  I will get bored lose focus and then lose the game. Add to that the fact that I usually am on in the evenings rather than the mornings, and you will understand why I constantly lose to new players even though I can give higher level players like werekingdom and schwenkgott a decent fight.

This is what ultimately makes playing in real life more enjoyable than octgn. An in person game is more social and therefore more engaging, so I'm less likely to zone out.

Honestly I think we just need a hard time limit on the planning phases and maybe on phases in general for casual games and not just competitive ones. Time limits on phases should be the default way to play. People should play with time limits on phases unless both players agree not to. Once people are used to playing faster they will think faster. And maybe I need to not play so late at night. And last night I played a game for five hours and it was not clear who would win until after the game was over and we revealed our spellbooks. We stopped when I was too bored and tired to continue. It was like one something in the morning. And we started at around 7 or 8 in the evening.

Seriously we need to start using chess clocks or something. That way people can spend different amount of time thinking in different rounds but they're still on a clock. The question is how much time to give each player. It's better than using an overall match time limit because that affects control more than it affects aggro.

I've had to start playing Pokémon in the middle of arena games because otherwise I will get too bored and lose focus completely. I shouldn't need to have a 3ds in front of me to multitask with in order to enjoy a game of Mage Wars.

[zot]

my suggestion when teaching or playing with new players is to play evenly matched straight foward mages. such as beastmaster and warlords. heavy on creatures and low on dot or lockdown strategies. keep the number of enchants low, and low on tricks. that in my experience allowed them to get used to the flow of the game, and their confidence and skills improved quickly.

start off playing creatures and perhaps mana. keep the armor relatively low on yourself. give them opportunities to exploit your weaknesses without dictating how to play or showing them where you are weak. they will get there. as their skill improves, you can start being more aggressive and making more strong plays. that strategy worked well when i was teaching new players. i kept playing the same book over and over, always opening the same way. then as their aggression picked up, i would slowly increase mine. then as thay finally had a good grasp of their mage and level of play was advanced enough, play your strongest against them. change up your opening on them, and show them different style. by that time, they can appreciate and understand the difference in your play against them. if you smash them, they will probably think it was awesome and try to emulate the style.

it certainly is not fun for new players to get dumped into competitive scenarios, and as you mentioned, wait bored while they get destroyed in slow motion.

[Kelanen]

I've come back from a fair number of games where I'm 20-25 life down, and I've lost a few where I was on the other side also. some mages are much more capable of this than others, but it all takes experience, playing for your outs, and playing to run a an opposing spellbook out of specific threats.

Seriously we need to start using chess clocks or something. That way people can spend different amount of time thinking in different rounds but they're still on a clock. The question is how much time to give each player. It's better than using an overall match time limit because that affects control more than it affects aggro.

No, we don't, but perhaps you do. You are welcome to say what you want/need in your games, but don't presume to speak for all of us.

I don't have ADHD, I LIKE long games, the longer the better and happily 16hr games of TI3. If MW runs to 3-4hrs I'm good with that, and would rather play one long game, than several shorter ones in the same time (that applies to any games).

Tournaments of all games need time limits. For casual play, that's down to what the players involved want.

it certainly is not fun for new players to get dumped into competitive scenarios, and as you mentioned, wait bored while they get destroyed in slow motion.

Again, that depends on the player. Competitive players like me thrive on that, and want it in every new game I learn. Early on in the learning curve, I'm happy to concede, and start another (and take advice on when you reach that point). With experience, I'll concede something truly unwinnable, but I enjoy the challenge of trying to bring it around.

I've had problems in introducing new players to the game, but it's honestly never been these. I suspect it depends what kind of players you introduce though - I don't think boardgamers are a good fit for example, and different kinds of gamers will present different challenges.

[Coshade]

In a casual game, I usually concede pretty quickly. My 4 fireball with adramelech druid doesn't care about her win/loss ratio. When it comes to tournament games I get into a never give up never surrender mindset. You never know if the opponent will make a blunder. If it's casual I just want to play more games, and work on my initial strategy is just entertaining. I think it's important to note that training for competitive is the same mindset as playing competitive to me, while casual play is just for fun.

Also this is a game of contemplation. Like chess, there can be quite a bit of time while players figure out what they want to do. In my experience the more a player knows the game, and their style of play, the faster they will end up deciding their moves.

[Kelanen]

When it comes to tournament games I get into a never give up never surrender mindset. Y

Oh absolutely - I never, ever concede a tournament match - it's often fairly easy to drag out a modified loss. Actually I object to other people conceding (although you can't legislate to stop it) because it affects the standings of both parties. 

I think it's important to note that training for competitive is the same mindset as playing competitive to me, while casual play is just for fun.

Absolutely. Tournament practice needs to be tournament conditions  and mindset - timers, no takebacks, etc.

Also this is a game of contemplation. Like chess, there can be quite a bit of time while players figure out what they want to do. In my experience the more a player knows the game, and their style of play, the faster they will end up deciding their moves.

Definitely. I find knowing your book, and knowing what you can do, ho fast certain strategies can kick in etc is crucial, and this just comes with experience. and that speeds you up a lot.

Occasionally I'll have an agonising planning phase lasting a few minutes. Mostly I'm done in <20 secs, maybe 30-40 secs if I have lots of deployments. That almost always includes a rough plan of my next turn, what spells and thus what mana I want then.

We also have to acknowledge that some players are just faster/slower than others. That's not linked to the quality of their analysis you can be bad and fast, or good and slow as well as the reverse, or just average. It is what it is.

[Sailor Vulcan]

When it comes to tournament games I get into a never give up never surrender mindset. Y

Oh absolutely - I never, ever concede a tournament match - it's often fairly easy to drag out a modified loss. Actually I object to other people conceding (although you can't legislate to stop it) because it affects the standings of both parties. 

I think it's important to note that training for competitive is the same mindset as playing competitive to me, while casual play is just for fun.

Absolutely. Tournament practice needs to be tournament conditions  and mindset - timers, no takebacks, etc.

Also this is a game of contemplation. Like chess, there can be quite a bit of time while players figure out what they want to do. In my experience the more a player knows the game, and their style of play, the faster they will end up deciding their moves.

Definitely. I find knowing your book, and knowing what you can do, ho fast certain strategies can kick in etc is crucial, and this just comes with experience. and that speeds you up a lot.

Occasionally I'll have an agonising planning phase lasting a few minutes. Mostly I'm done in <20 secs, maybe 30-40 secs if I have lots of deployments. That almost always includes a rough plan of my next turn, what spells and thus what mana I want then.

We also have to acknowledge that some players are just faster/slower than others. That's not linked to the quality of their analysis you can be bad and fast, or good and slow as well as the reverse, or just average. It is what it is.

The length of the game alone isn't the problem. The problem is when the game continues for hours and hours AFTER one player has been put in a position where they cannot win unless their opponent makes an improbably large blunder. If the outcome is 99.9% certain, and it remains 99.9% certain for two plus hours until the game ends exactly as one would expect, that means the game was already won two plus hours ago and your just wasting time dragging things out. Four hour games would be fine if they actually had four hours worth of quality game play. Instead we get games with 1.5 hours worth of game play, some of which take 1.5 hours to finish and some of which take 4 hours to finish. And the ones that take 4 hours to finish tend to spend most of their quality game play in the first half of the game, the part where the outcome hasn't already been decided yet.

[Kelanen]

The length of the game alone isn't the problem. The problem is when the game continues for hours and hours AFTER one player has been put in a position where they cannot win unless their opponent makes an improbably large blunder. If the outcome is 99.9% certain, and it remains 99.9% certain for two plus hours until the game ends exactly as one would expect, that means the game was already won two plus hours ago and your just wasting time dragging things out.

No sorry, but either the outcome was nowhere near 99.9% certain, or the winner-designate is closing very poorly.

80% certain sure, and that's worth playing on for, and could take that long. 95% certain we are talking you can finish them in one round, and if that's thwarted you can do it again, and again...

If these games are going on another 2.5 hrs then it was not nearly as certain or over as you seem to think. There's also a problem with a lack of finishing moves in these books I suspect...

[silverclawgrizzly]

I am 100% with Coshade here. I've won the matches I was way behind on and I've lost the ones I should have had in the bag. If I'm playing a casual game I'll concede so that I can get in another match and learn more. In a tournament you'd better be prepared to kill me to win.

[drmambo23]

I agree that game time can be a problem with new players. But as long as you make the game enjoyable while teaching it and dont smash their face in like allandel does then you should be good.
I would never reccomend putting a new player what my druid went through btw lol. If they make a mistake let them fix it if its casual. Shark even gave me the chamce to save my mana and not reveal it. Wouldnt have chamged anything but still good sportsmanship.

The game you bring up, i was using a new deck and wanted to give it a try. Should it be used 1st time in a tourney? Probably not but what the hell. I did concede but the game, while it may not have been good, was really fun. I lost by giving up but i still had loads of fun during it all. Should i know the druid more, know what to watch out for, etc? Yeah. But im not 100% on that like i would be with another mage. But thats the fun of mage wars, for me. Even in a tournament game that went on for an extended time, used all my reaources amd still left me with nothing to gain in the end - i enjoyed the game.
Also,
Like coshade said, in casual games i will concede and start a new game if i feel my strategy is crap or if my oponent or myself want to try a different opening, different plays, etc.

[Phillus]

Sometimes I feel unlucky.
>Opponent has one health and 2 armor.
>Roll all blanks on force hammer.
>Then lose...

[drmambo23]

Been there too!

[zot]

sigh. me too. recalling 2015 gencon tournament and having an easy kill shot to win it all, and rolling about three points below average and miss the kill by one point. 

[Super Sorcerer]

ב"ה
I once lost a game after I had a lead when my opponent was lucky.
I won at least one game when I was in a desperate condition (meaning I was sure I was going to lose) and I had great luck.

If you have those fireballs and hurl rocks, then a few very lucky rolls (combined with lucky rolls for burns) could turn a bad situation into a victory.

I never played on octagon, but only on a real board. I've seen someone concede only once, when he was both losing and had to go. Usually players keep going until one mage is dead. Perhaps on octagon it is different, I never tried.