Stack Size and Relative Health

[piousflea]

Just a random thought of mine:

Stack Size is the total mana cost of a creature + enchantments. For example, an unbuffed Dark Pact Slayer is a 13-mana stack, while a Vampiric, Cheetah Speed, Bear Strength Lord of Fire is a 40-mana stack.

Everyone knows that Stack Size is the most important part of "delay" card effectiveness. Banishing an unbuffed Dark Pact is spending 14 mana to delay a 13-mana stack, and probably not a very smart move. On the other hand, banishing a fully buffed Lord of Fire is spending 14 mana to delay a 40-mana stack. That's pretty awesome.

However, you can also think of Stack Size as a modifier for damage and healing. For example, dealing 5 damage to an unbuffed Timber Wolf (10 hp, 9 mana) is "worth" 9*(5/10) = 4.5 mana. Dealing 5 damage to a fully buffed Lord of Fire (14 hp, 40 mana) is "worth" 40*(5/14) = 14.3 mana. On the converse, healing 5 damage from that Lord of Fire is "worth" 14.3 mana.

When you think of Stack Size as multiplying the value of all damage and healing, you begin to realize how risky it is to over-buff a card. The aforementioned Lord of Fire is so valuable that even highly inefficient attacks like Arc Lightning become cost-efficient. Your opponent has every incentive to nuke that mega-stack out of the sky, no matter what it takes. And when that mega-stack falls you lose 40 mana worth of cards.

For this reason, I always try to spread out enchantments between my creatures and my Mage. Stack size is a non-issue for the Mage, since your Mage is always a target regardless of what is on him - actually, having more enchantments on your mage makes it harder to focus him down.

[sIKE]

Wouldn't you really open yourself up to Purge Magic with that large of a stack or at least Force Hold (It would be worth the 3 mana upkeep!)? I have an Agony in my Priestess Spell book to help de-buff Creatures like this.

[Koz]

Wouldn't you really open yourself up to Purge Magic with that large of a stack or at least Force Hold (It would be worth the 3 mana upkeep!)? I have an Agony in my Priestess Spell book to help de-buff Creatures like this.

I think that was his point.  Putting all of your eggs in one basket is a great way to have that basket knocked out of your hands.  I had a discussion with someone in another thread about this very thing.  He was a big proponent of the "super-grizzly strategy" (my term, lol) but my recommendation was to spread the buffs around so that he wasn't so easily countered.

Personally I think a raw, unbuffed, "big guy" (Lord of Fire, Hydra, Grizzly, Angel, etc) is a massive threat in it's own right that your opponent will ALREADY feel like they need to deal with it before it rips them apart.  Adding more buffs to it is overkill unless your opponent actually lets you get away with it (in that case Battle Fury them in the face to show them the error of their ways ).

[Tacullu64]

Wouldn't you really open yourself up to Purge Magic with that large of a stack or at least Force Hold (It would be worth the 3 mana upkeep!)? I have an Agony in my Priestess Spell book to help de-buff Creatures like this.

I think that was his point.  Putting all of your eggs in one basket is a great way to have that basket knocked out of your hands.  I had a discussion with someone in another thread about this very thing.  He was a big proponent of the "super-grizzly strategy" (my term, lol) but my recommendation was to spread the buffs around so that he wasn't so easily countered.

Personally I think a raw, unbuffed, "big guy" (Lord of Fire, Hydra, Grizzly, Angel, etc) is a massive threat in it's own right that your opponent will ALREADY feel like they need to deal with it before it rips them apart.  Adding more buffs to it is overkill unless your opponent actually lets you get away with it (in that case Battle Fury them in the face to show them the error of their ways ).

I try to spread the buffs around too. I agree with piousflea that stacking them on the mage isn't a big problem although I haven't really done that yet.

An unbuffed big guy puts me in a killing mood, a buffed big guy pegs out my enthusiasm meter to get him out of my face. Which I guess is kinda the point in the first place. The only problem would be if I dealt with him in too efficient a manner. The way this game is designed any threat can be dealt with, the question then becomes did you put what you need in your spellbook. It will be interesting to see how the meta develops over the year. I think by its very nature MW may have a very slippery meta that is difficult to get a grip on. Sorry I digressed a little.

[Preacher]

Whilst I don't disagree with this and the theory behind it (priority targets and all that)... all I could think of reading it was "none of that kills the enemy mage"

I guess I try and stay more on target than most and very much subscribe to 'other stuff' being a distraction.

For me there are things you can live with against you and things that stop you winning, the list of latter things there is quite small in my opinion. Obviously you need to deal with a huge creature up in your grill and threatening to kill you before you kill the opposing mage but folk are often distracted in games like this by other things when you only win by killing the mage.

[Tacullu64]

Whilst I don't disagree with this and the theory behind it (priority targets and all that)... all I could think of reading it was "none of that kills the enemy mage"

I guess I try and stay more on target than most and very much subscribe to 'other stuff' being a distraction.

For me there are things you can live with against you and things that stop you winning, the list of latter things there is quite small in my opinion. Obviously you need to deal with a huge creature up in your grill and threatening to kill you before you kill the opposing mage but folk are often distracted in games like this by other things when you only win by killing the mage.

I think what your describing is a matter of different play styles. Some take a more aggressive stance, while some prefer to counterpunch, and others think defense first. I tend to favor counter punching and defense. I do play aggressively from time to time but it is out of my comfort zone. I usually play aggressive builds to get a feel for the game from the other side and hopefully gain some insight that will help me with my prefered style. Defensive players can be just as focused they just have a different path to the enemy mage.

[Preacher]

Whilst I don't disagree with this and the theory behind it (priority targets and all that)... all I could think of reading it was "none of that kills the enemy mage"

I guess I try and stay more on target than most and very much subscribe to 'other stuff' being a distraction.

For me there are things you can live with against you and things that stop you winning, the list of latter things there is quite small in my opinion. Obviously you need to deal with a huge creature up in your grill and threatening to kill you before you kill the opposing mage but folk are often distracted in games like this by other things when you only win by killing the mage.

I think what your describing is a matter of different play styles. Some take a more aggressive stance, while some prefer to counterpunch, and others think defense first. I tend to favor counter punching and defense. I do play aggressively from time to time but it is out of my comfort zone. I usually play aggressive builds to get a feel for the game from the other side and hopefully gain some insight that will help me with my prefered style. Defensive players can be just as focused they just have a different path to the enemy mage.

Aye, I think you're right in part. Don't get me wrong I am a very defensive player, after all, if you're not alive you can't win  B)

I prefer fire and forget defences though like the permanents in the game that you can use to keep yourself alive and concentrate your important actions on killing the opposing mage.

I bet this applies even more in a tourney game... in my limited MW experience, defending and playing the long game is pretty cool in terms of winning.... winning in 90 mins though, I'm not so certain there.

[Tacullu64]

Whilst I don't disagree with this and the theory behind it (priority targets and all that)... all I could think of reading it was "none of that kills the enemy mage"

I guess I try and stay more on target than most and very much subscribe to 'other stuff' being a distraction.

For me there are things you can live with against you and things that stop you winning, the list of latter things there is quite small in my opinion. Obviously you need to deal with a huge creature up in your grill and threatening to kill you before you kill the opposing mage but folk are often distracted in games like this by other things when you only win by killing the mage.

I think what your describing is a matter of different play styles. Some take a more aggressive stance, while some prefer to counterpunch, and others think defense first. I tend to favor counter punching and defense. I do play aggressively from time to time but it is out of my comfort zone. I usually play aggressive builds to get a feel for the game from the other side and hopefully gain some insight that will help me with my prefered style. Defensive players can be just as focused they just have a different path to the enemy mage.

Aye, I think you're right in part. Don't get me wrong I am a very defensive player, after all, if you're not alive you can't win  B)

I prefer fire and forget defences though like the permanents in the game that you can use to keep yourself alive and concentrate your important actions on killing the opposing mage.

I bet this applies even more in a tourney game... in my limited MW experience, defending and playing the long game is pretty cool in terms of winning.... winning in 90 mins though, I'm not so certain there.

When it comes to defensive players (me at least) it's a matter of how exposed to danger you feel. I like to feel like I've got fairly strong control of f the battlefield before I'm comfortable turning my full attention to the enemy mage. I'm sure that different players have different comfort zones.

In the context of this thread I wouldn't feel comfortable with a super creature running around for sure (unless I controlled him of course).

[Preacher]

"When it comes to defensive players (me at least) it's a matter of how exposed to danger you feel. I like to feel like I've got fairly strong control of f the battlefield before I'm comfortable turning my full attention to the enemy mage. I'm sure that different players have different comfort zones.

In the context of this thread I wouldn't feel comfortable with a super creature running around for sure (unless I controlled him of course)."

Apologies for quotes, snipping the post became very clunky.

I'm no where near that risk-averse in the game, I have no issue at all a super creature running around, I have an issue if it's being played well and is coming at me like a truck  

Situations differ in MW greatly I guess but I'd best put my comfort zone somewhere around 3 turns ahead... if I feel like I am able to stay alive for 3 turns and am 'winning' (a very situational and judgement-specific call that) i'm happy. I find going too heavy on defense *and* getting distracted too much is a surefire way to minimise actions and dice on target (mage) and lose.

[piousflea]

Whilst I don't disagree with this and the theory behind it (priority targets and all that)... all I could think of reading it was "none of that kills the enemy mage"

I guess I try and stay more on target than most and very much subscribe to 'other stuff' being more of a distraction.

As I explained in my lord of terror post, the hard counter to anyone who tries to burn down your Mage is to put on a few pieces of defensive equipment. Armor, cloak, plus or minus blocks and regeneration, can prevent a Mage kill for enough turns that The Lord of Fire simply beats you down.

[Preacher]

Whilst I don't disagree with this and the theory behind it (priority targets and all that)... all I could think of reading it was "none of that kills the enemy mage"

I guess I try and stay more on target than most and very much subscribe to 'other stuff' being more of a distraction.

As I explained in my lord of terror post, the hard counter to anyone who tries to burn down your Mage is to put on a few pieces of defensive equipment. Armor, cloak, plus or minus blocks and regeneration, can prevent a Mage kill for enough turns that The Lord of Fire simply beats you down.

Thanks for stating the obvious there