The New Warlord.

[Enti]

Still way stronger than BW Warlord 

[Kharhaz]

So if you take GenCon as the End/Beginning of a year I would say that going into this year that Forcemaster and Priest are the weakest mages.

This next year with FM and Warlord academy to add to the collection, and maybe others, Warlord is getting a significant boost in viability. Forcemaster? Not so much.

Forcemaster is and always will be a mage style that has not been supported in a long time. Actions win games and the forcemaster is a tough mage to play, I would say the hardest. She's "weak" because of the lack of options that she can use to stay competitive and when you bring the game out of the vacuum of theory craft into a setting where one book must run the gambit on a majority different play styles, her book just cannot cut it.

No other mage is in such a position and that's why she is the bottom of the pool.

Lets also remember that terms such as "weak" and "low tier" are not death sentences, these mages can win; They just have to work harder than the rest.

[zot]

agreed.

[silverclawgrizzly]

i think the bw warlord is a strong mage. not top shelf, but certainly not the bottom as you suggest.

Seriously. What can I do to convince you, that BW Warlord is the weakest mage (together with Siren)?

I am not even sure, if the Warlord CAN win at all against druid/necro/priestess, even with enormous luck and constantly rolling above average.

Well, I am online on OCTGN and if I lose 1 out of 5 matches with tier1 against tier3 I might reconsider my position. But honestly, I don't see it happening. The tier1 advantage really exists, it's not something I made up to be edgy in a forum.

/edit: Keejchen, Powlich, Jack..  if you read this..  you know what to do (if you don't agree with my assessment :p)

You don't convince us, that's the thing. You can argue all you want online but I've seen enough matches in person(and remember I judge tournaments for Arcane Wonders as a part time job) to know that no mage is truly inferior and no mage is superior.

We're arguing opinions here, that's all. Your opinion is your own and that's worthy of respect, but so are others. Respect.

[zot]

agreed. all mostly opinion based on folks meta exposure.

[Enti]

but I've seen enough matches in person(and remember I judge tournaments for Arcane Wonders as a part time job) to know that no mage is truly inferior and no mage is superior.

What must happen for you to admit/realize that not all mages are equal?
Would you only be convinced if you see 1 specific mage losing every single time? Even if the best player in the world plays against a total newby? Would only that suffice?
Because it is natural for you to see a lot of games in which BW Warlord wins. Actually the more games you judge, the more often/regular you will see Warlords on the winning side. But does that have any, ANY, relevance to what we are talking about?

Because your previous poster phrased it beautifully:

Lets also remember that terms such as "weak" and "low tier" are not death sentences, these mages can win; They just have to work harder than the rest.

And I am not sure why you think that real games are more meaningful than online games. Were you referring to the time limit?


In the end I just want to explicitly confirm that it is not disrespectful in any way if 2 people are arguing, right? And that I don't disrespect you as a person because I don't share your view of "everything is perfectly balanced and there are no tangible differences between the Mage's powerlevel".
(I just want to check, because I have the nagging feeling that you might feel personally insulted that I want you to convince you from my point of view)


Not that I like to repeat myself, but somehow this statement gets ignored:
We could even do a "live test" in the forum, collecting some data on this subject.
Could look for example like that:
Self-evaluation from both players before the game: They need to assign a number to their experience (from 1-10)
And then we wait for a few games to happen. If the so called tier1 Mages are not inherently favored, it should sooner or later be something like 50/50 when it comes to win/loss ratio between roughly the same skilled opponents. But I think it'd be more to 75%, 3 out of 4.. in favor of the tier1 mages. And literally 0% that someone who has less experience wins against another player with more experience who also plays the stronger mage. (Well, 'stronger mage' - in my eyes)

[zot]

i do agree that not all mages are equal. we just differ on which mages are strongest, weakest, and the others in the middle. and the list could change based on time limits. and i was stirring the pot just a bit because i know most folks disagree with me about the bw warlord. and that is ok.

[silverclawgrizzly]

I'm not trying to be rude but I've already told you Enti, you're not convincing anyone of your view point. Get that straight. IT. IS. NOT. HAPPENING. Any and all attempts will be ignored as someone who's not even listening, thus why should I listen to you?

I get that you have a view point. I even understand you're not alone in this view point. I do not share it and there isn't a way you'll convince me otherwise.

[Coshade]

Hey guys I think we are going in circles. Can we stay on topic. That is awesome new Warlord stuff!

[silverclawgrizzly]

Agreed Coshade.

[zot]

free battle orders is awesome.

[RomeoXero]

Am i the only one concerned that a couple of these cards are way more powerful in arena than the counterparts that already exist here? I mean I'm not crying out anything but this cam at least pull the conversation back into focus.
I know that they are designed for both games but some of these effects are freaking ridiculous when you scale them up. Gear up is insanely powerful and does something that currently no other cards do, and does it on demand.  The options are nearly endless as well. The halberd wouldn't worry me quite so much but it's costed for academy. It's crazy cheap for what it does. There's no doubt that a new play style is emerging for the warlords wth a very warlord feel. But damn, its got me a bit concerned at what I'm gonna see come outa this set for arena specifically.

[Kharhaz]

Am i the only one concerned that a couple of these cards are way more powerful in arena than the counterparts that already exist here? I mean I'm not crying out anything but this cam at least pull the conversation back into focus.
I know that they are designed for both games but some of these effects are freaking ridiculous when you scale them up. Gear up is insanely powerful and does something that currently no other cards do, and does it on demand.  The options are nearly endless as well. The halberd wouldn't worry me quite so much but it's costed for academy. It's crazy cheap for what it does. There's no doubt that a new play style is emerging for the warlords wth a very warlord feel. But damn, its got me a bit concerned at what I'm gonna see come outa this set for arena specifically.

This was a very real concern during the entire development life of Gear Up, which was a very long time. Gear Up first hit playtesting before the Battle Fury / Shalla / Temple errata years ago.

So I cannot express enough about the degree, care, and level of testing that this card has undergone and the various iterations that came and went to get exactly what was desired from a card of this power. It's a very good card! A book defining card that can even turn the tide of a game. One thing this card shows is that there are not many cards that have that kind of potential.

There are only a few cards in Mage Wars that I personally hold to the "top tier" of power cards, Mordok's Obelisk being my personal choice as "most powerful card in Mage Wars"; gear up is a close second. I remember playing my newly built Crown Warlock book vs Zot's Disciple of Radiance book at last years GenCon. I let him build up to some 7 or 8 creatures and dropped a Orb that would let me win the game.

This set has that kind of potential but its not as obvious and wont necessarily win games the same way as the orb. Most importantly in my eyes is the ability for the warlord to truly swarm with mid cost creatures as early as turn one; extremely fun way to play and Academy Warlord, so far, is the most important Academy expansion to come out.

Like all good new cards, this set forces a change in current books and book building strategy; which is overall a very healthy thing for the game.

Long Story longer, Your concerns have been voiced long before you knew that you had them and great care has been taken to insure that Mage Wars remains a fun game to play without adding silly "Timmy" cards unnecessarily.

[zot]

indeed, the obelisk ruined that game. it was a mid range book summoning a bunch of asyran clerics who were to help heal the priestess as she beat on stuff. the mana drain proved too much for her.

[jacksmack]

Im a bit sad to see gear up being mage cast.
I would have loved for Gurmash being able to cast this as it would provide a lot more new openings for at least the BW warlord.
Still a very nice and refreshing card.

The new helm (love the artwork) together with gear up takes ring of command from horrible to a very good , but not required choice. I like that.

Regarding the formations I'm excited to see them in Play.
I'm not yet convinced that they as strong as other perceive them. (For arena.)

But very interesting expansion for arena so far.