1
Spells / Re: Core Spells Revisited
« on: March 13, 2019, 08:56:47 PM »
Actually, Turn to Stone might be another spell that would work well with dissipate rather than upkeep.
March 22, 2019, 01:34:18 AM
Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
2
Spellbook Design and Construction / Re: Warlord slinger
« on: March 11, 2019, 09:46:11 PM »
Yeah, that would be a wizard.
3
Spellbook Design and Construction / Re: Warlord slinger
« on: March 11, 2019, 08:22:11 PM »
I won a game with a new deck last week that would give this a great run for its money, I think. Would be happy to test you on octgn.
4
Spells / Re: Core Spells Revisited
« on: March 11, 2019, 08:18:50 PM »
A challenge to you, Farkas, to make a book or two out of only the Core cards. Play against others using the full array of expansions. See how you go.
I personally think that a Core-only book could still be competitive, at least for the basic 4 mages. Most of the new spells that have come in over the years are really designed for specific mages or are really just variations on established themes.
I see where you are going with Incorporeal and Defences, but it is still also true that most ethereal and unavoidable attacks are still once-offs. Not many creatures have them in-built. So if you are going down the Incorporeal route, take it all the way and see your opponent run out of options. Ditto the unavoidables.
The two major changes I would make to core cards are these:
Gate to Hell. Initial casting cost reduced to 7 (to match equivalents like Rajan's Fury). Still 12 mana to open it, but from then on it becomes a spawnpoint for demons only, and generates 1 mana per turn.
All spawnpoints (Core or expansion, so getting a little off topic) should become unique rather than epic, but become full actions to cast (with the possible exception of the Crusade Banner). If you build a book around a spawnpoint your entire strategy can be (and often is) blown away (literally) in a couple of turns by Force Hammers. With very limited means to repair conjurations, it seems fair that you could have more than one spawnpoint in your book. But it should be an investment to put them out.
I have not found that the flyers are less useful now than they were. I always found them a little weak. Guards take care of them nicely without the need for knockdowns and the like.
Core cards I have never ever seen played by me or an opponent in 5 years of playing are few:
Mountain Gorilla (tho I have put it in a few books it has never come out)
Moonglow Faerie
Retaliate
Turn to Stone
Some others are rarely seen, but still useful in the right spot (I have won at least two games by a perfectly timed Drain Power, for instance)
(One last off topic thought: I have fallen in love with the dissipate tokens on the Force creatures, and reckon that if there was ever a Mage Wars arena second edition, all creatures other than familiars should have dissipate. It is supposed to be a duel of magic, after all, and not the race to build armies as it often turns into. And fluff wise, summoning creatures is almost always a temporary thing in the literature. But that is a debate for another time and place.)
I personally think that a Core-only book could still be competitive, at least for the basic 4 mages. Most of the new spells that have come in over the years are really designed for specific mages or are really just variations on established themes.
I see where you are going with Incorporeal and Defences, but it is still also true that most ethereal and unavoidable attacks are still once-offs. Not many creatures have them in-built. So if you are going down the Incorporeal route, take it all the way and see your opponent run out of options. Ditto the unavoidables.
The two major changes I would make to core cards are these:
Gate to Hell. Initial casting cost reduced to 7 (to match equivalents like Rajan's Fury). Still 12 mana to open it, but from then on it becomes a spawnpoint for demons only, and generates 1 mana per turn.
All spawnpoints (Core or expansion, so getting a little off topic) should become unique rather than epic, but become full actions to cast (with the possible exception of the Crusade Banner). If you build a book around a spawnpoint your entire strategy can be (and often is) blown away (literally) in a couple of turns by Force Hammers. With very limited means to repair conjurations, it seems fair that you could have more than one spawnpoint in your book. But it should be an investment to put them out.
I have not found that the flyers are less useful now than they were. I always found them a little weak. Guards take care of them nicely without the need for knockdowns and the like.
Core cards I have never ever seen played by me or an opponent in 5 years of playing are few:
Mountain Gorilla (tho I have put it in a few books it has never come out)
Moonglow Faerie
Retaliate
Turn to Stone
Some others are rarely seen, but still useful in the right spot (I have won at least two games by a perfectly timed Drain Power, for instance)
(One last off topic thought: I have fallen in love with the dissipate tokens on the Force creatures, and reckon that if there was ever a Mage Wars arena second edition, all creatures other than familiars should have dissipate. It is supposed to be a duel of magic, after all, and not the race to build armies as it often turns into. And fluff wise, summoning creatures is almost always a temporary thing in the literature. But that is a debate for another time and place.)
5
Strategy and Tactics / Best intercept guard for a holdfast Anvil Throne Warlord?
« on: March 06, 2019, 06:57:19 PM »
Hi Folks
Playing around with a concept of a stronghold warlord that utilises a hill and the various zone enchantments to build a castle. I need an interceptor to catch those incoming fireballs. I cannot decide which to go with of the three obvious choices.
Guardian Angel. Pros: Aegis, a defence, pretty good hit points and the self healing is awesome. Cons: high SBP cost and no synergy with the warlord's soldier commands.
Dwarf Panzergarde. Pros: loads of hit points, great defence chance, soldier. Cons: lightning vulnerability, no healing.
Noble Vanguard. Pros: Vigilant! Soldier. Cons: fairly high SBP cost, low hit points, no healing.
I am leaning towards the Panzergarde at the moment, but am worried I might have to carry a bit more healing/regen to keep him up.
Would appreciate any thoughts/opinions.
Playing around with a concept of a stronghold warlord that utilises a hill and the various zone enchantments to build a castle. I need an interceptor to catch those incoming fireballs. I cannot decide which to go with of the three obvious choices.
Guardian Angel. Pros: Aegis, a defence, pretty good hit points and the self healing is awesome. Cons: high SBP cost and no synergy with the warlord's soldier commands.
Dwarf Panzergarde. Pros: loads of hit points, great defence chance, soldier. Cons: lightning vulnerability, no healing.
Noble Vanguard. Pros: Vigilant! Soldier. Cons: fairly high SBP cost, low hit points, no healing.
I am leaning towards the Panzergarde at the moment, but am worried I might have to carry a bit more healing/regen to keep him up.
Would appreciate any thoughts/opinions.
6
Spellbook Design and Construction / Re: Version 2.0 Straywood
« on: March 06, 2019, 06:48:46 PM »Your pretty vulnerable to a forcemaster and or anything that would run incorporeal creatures or conjurations. Suggestion maybe force hammer, or divine might.
Having recently used a combination of Whirling Spirits and Poison Gas to beat down a Beastmaster that had no Ethereal attacks, I second this comment.
7
Spellbook Design and Construction / Re: Warlord slinger
« on: February 26, 2019, 09:34:58 PM »You may want to consider a Steep Hill to give you more of a boost on your Range Attacks. Position it in the center of the Arena and you should have good coverage of the battle field.
The OP has gone heavy on the range 0-1 attacks. With short range spells there is a need to keep mobile, and Steep Hill fixes your position. I would suggest replacing some of those range 1s with range 2s, just in case.
I do wonder at the choice of Golems as bodyguards. If the warlord needs to move to fire his spells off, then the Slow of the Golems would get in the way. IF guarding is their primary purpose, then for an extra couple of mana you'd get Sir Corazin, or for less cost you could have Panzergardes with their intercept or (at more SBP) a Temple High Guard.
But hey, if the book is working for you, then don't worry about what we are saying.
8
General Discussion / Re: It is 2019 - What do we know?
« on: February 20, 2019, 06:01:47 PM »
Well, as far as I am concerned the game is not dead yet. I am in fact teaching it to another new player today.
Maybe he'll like it, maybe he won't, but we have to keep working to build the base.
Maybe he'll like it, maybe he won't, but we have to keep working to build the base.
9
General Discussion / Re: Academy Necromancer Speculation
« on: February 19, 2019, 04:04:51 PM »
Certainly looks so.
For me, I am looking forward to a few mummies to keep Tjusut company. He gets lonely standing on guard all by himself.
For me, I am looking forward to a few mummies to keep Tjusut company. He gets lonely standing on guard all by himself.
10
Spellbook Design and Construction / Re: Skeleton Swarm
« on: February 18, 2019, 03:51:10 PM »
Looks good.
I've been mucking about with a Blightheart book and will take some of these ideas and run with them (particularly like the Gale Burst v swarm option).
I will note that Overextend does not work on Blightheart, since he is not a Soldier.
The problem will be keeping Blightheart up and running. I foresee he will draw as much hate as a Drokarr bloodreaper. Mort and Reassemble will be vital, but have you considered throwing in an Acolyte of the Bog Queen to try to keep him standing? (yes, the IoP will take it down, but you could always zombify it.)
I've been mucking about with a Blightheart book and will take some of these ideas and run with them (particularly like the Gale Burst v swarm option).
I will note that Overextend does not work on Blightheart, since he is not a Soldier.
The problem will be keeping Blightheart up and running. I foresee he will draw as much hate as a Drokarr bloodreaper. Mort and Reassemble will be vital, but have you considered throwing in an Acolyte of the Bog Queen to try to keep him standing? (yes, the IoP will take it down, but you could always zombify it.)
11
General Discussion / Re: New Arena Player - Introduction
« on: February 06, 2019, 05:26:26 PM »
As the others have said.
Also:
Be prepared to lose to the new players. Give them suggestions on possible plays, warn them if they are about to do something particularly silly, and make some plays of your own that are not optimal but which demonstrate the sorts of things that can be done in the game.
I have taught three others in my time and each time they beat me in the apprentice match, going away with a smile. When they each came back for the second game, though, well...
Also:
Be prepared to lose to the new players. Give them suggestions on possible plays, warn them if they are about to do something particularly silly, and make some plays of your own that are not optimal but which demonstrate the sorts of things that can be done in the game.
I have taught three others in my time and each time they beat me in the apprentice match, going away with a smile. When they each came back for the second game, though, well...
12
Rules Discussion / Re: Acid Blast (academy, not promo)
« on: January 11, 2019, 03:22:31 PM »
Thanks all.
I had seen the arena promo, but wasn’t sure if the academy card was trying to reimplement it in a different way.
I will have to go thumb my nose at my opponent and say I was right. Would have meant I had a better chance at taking down those two gargoyles. Might have swung the game...
I had seen the arena promo, but wasn’t sure if the academy card was trying to reimplement it in a different way.
I will have to go thumb my nose at my opponent and say I was right. Would have meant I had a better chance at taking down those two gargoyles. Might have swung the game...
13
Rules Discussion / Acid Blast (academy, not promo)
« on: January 11, 2019, 05:42:38 AM »
Still going through the new academy druid/elementalist cards.
Acid Blast
5 mana for a sweeping 2-dice attack, corrode on a 9+ on the effect die.
That's simple enough.
But what does it mean when it says " When this attack Assigns Effects place an additional Corrode condition on the defender"?
Is it (A): if the defender gets a Corrode (i.e. you roll 9+), it actually gets two Corrodes.
Or is it (B): During the Damage and Effects Step (the arena equivalent to the academy Assigns Effects) the defender gets a Corrode regardless of what was rolled on the effect die
Or is it (C): (just spelling out what "9+ = Corrode" means in the attack bar)
Or is it some fourth option (D)?
Just had an in-game argument about it.
I said it must be (B), since no other academy attack card has the same sort of wording, ruling out (C), and the text is not a conditional (i.e. it says 'when', not 'if') which seems to rule out (A).
My opponent went for either (A) or (C), on the grounds that (B) would make the card too powerful for the cost.
Does anyone have any insights?
Acid Blast
5 mana for a sweeping 2-dice attack, corrode on a 9+ on the effect die.
That's simple enough.
But what does it mean when it says " When this attack Assigns Effects place an additional Corrode condition on the defender"?
Is it (A): if the defender gets a Corrode (i.e. you roll 9+), it actually gets two Corrodes.
Or is it (B): During the Damage and Effects Step (the arena equivalent to the academy Assigns Effects) the defender gets a Corrode regardless of what was rolled on the effect die
Or is it (C): (just spelling out what "9+ = Corrode" means in the attack bar)
Or is it some fourth option (D)?
Just had an in-game argument about it.
I said it must be (B), since no other academy attack card has the same sort of wording, ruling out (C), and the text is not a conditional (i.e. it says 'when', not 'if') which seems to rule out (A).
My opponent went for either (A) or (C), on the grounds that (B) would make the card too powerful for the cost.
Does anyone have any insights?
14
Rules Discussion / Academy Twister and Gale Burst vs Guards
« on: January 07, 2019, 06:29:37 PM »
Hi Folks
I am working my way through the new Elementalist and Druid cards (as you have probably guessed).
The Attack spells Gale Burst and Twister have as additional effects "if a minor creature is damaged by [the spell], it becomes inactive."
If you use either of these against a guarding creature that has yet to activate, does the guard lose the guard marker?
The relevant text in the rule book suggests that they wouldn't: "Guard markers are always removed at the beginning of a creature's action phase." A guard that is forced to become inactive does not get to have an action phase.
This does not seem right to me. The effect seems more akin to the arena Stun condition than anything else, and Stunned creatures certainly lose guard markers.
Does anyone have any thoughts on this?
I am working my way through the new Elementalist and Druid cards (as you have probably guessed).
The Attack spells Gale Burst and Twister have as additional effects "if a minor creature is damaged by [the spell], it becomes inactive."
If you use either of these against a guarding creature that has yet to activate, does the guard lose the guard marker?
The relevant text in the rule book suggests that they wouldn't: "Guard markers are always removed at the beginning of a creature's action phase." A guard that is forced to become inactive does not get to have an action phase.
This does not seem right to me. The effect seems more akin to the arena Stun condition than anything else, and Stunned creatures certainly lose guard markers.
Does anyone have any thoughts on this?
15
Rules Discussion / Re: Summon a creature in pillar of righteous flame
« on: January 07, 2019, 12:24:36 AM »
Oh! Thanks very much!
