April 24, 2019, 09:07:29 PM

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.


Messages - jacksmack

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 70
46
I guess it can be combined if you have a big enough table.

6 rows for the difference types (creatures, incantation, equipment etc).
And 4 columns with in-school (+novice), out of school, opposite school and multiple schools.
Should give a good overview of how your cards are split into the 6 types while showing what each category contains.

47
perhaps try sort the spells into 3 piles:
In school + novice, out of school and opposite school.

Then you can just add up the numbers in each pile individually and multiply each pile with 1, 2 or  3 - then add them together.
(Keep multiple school in a 4th pile, bridge troll Iím looking at you.)

48
General Discussion / Re: The current state of MW
« on: May 18, 2018, 11:52:53 AM »
While I donít quite agree with the interpretation of the numbers here are my thoughts:

The game is dead in the sense that we wonít see more content than a maximum of 2 academy releases - and Iím starting to doubt that we will even see that.

Unfortunately the whole rule frame for this game is too clumsy to ever survive in the long run.
Itís fun and easy enough for those of us who have been around since the rerelease or a year or so in.
But very very few new players will bother learning all the rule details that this game requires to fully playable.
Itís not that itís not worth it in the sense that you will get (IMO) the best 1vs1 game out there. But itís so much to learn and itís so much to memorize that doesnít make sense.

AW has steadily or even increasingly done the same mistake over and over... releasing content that has interaction conflicts with already released cards, thus increasing complexity,  without even being able to answer how the rule applies for these cases.
Back in the days a fairly standard reply would be: ďIím waiting for Bryan to get back on this oneĒ. And we would see no update for months, sometimes for more than a year(s).
An example of this is how do you deal with Akiroís favor (both revealed and in revealed) vs temple of the dawnbreaker temple.... it was never answered prior to release of PvsS. Yet they released the PvsS expansion with the Paladins basic ability interacting with both these cards.
There are many many more examples of rule clarifications which came months or even years later, and there are probably still unanswered conflicts of how to resolve various interactions.
With release of academy which has different wordings on the cards this has (imo) grown from a significant issue to a death threatening issue (for this game).

Sometimes I wish they could make a reboot of the whole backbone of the game so to speak without adjusting the cards :)
The game is simply to messy, clumksy and complex in some situations as it is.

49
Rules Discussion / Re: Weapon familiar for the warlock
« on: March 24, 2018, 02:51:50 PM »
Still its relevant when it casts it in relation to counter strike.

Is it possible to give it -2 dice before it hits back?

50
General Discussion / Re: Card Organization
« on: February 27, 2018, 05:24:16 AM »
Just curious... but why are you interested in sorting it like this?

Personally i sort it alphabetically within the 6 spell types (conjurations, incantations , enchantments, creatures, attack spells, equipment).

Anything else i tried out proved to be a pain to get the cards into a spellbook (and i would use the OCTGN spellbook builder - so i need to find the cards).

51
If i remember correctly you do not gain 2 mana when itís seeking dispelled.
So itís pretty worthless most of the time.

It serves a few uses such as getting that 1 mana back for a specific opening.
(By Fellella or Enchanters ring).

Probing for a nullify before you cast a critical spell such as poisoned blood.
However... this is not longer very good, as new spells has been released such as rust and ignite which you are almost always better off casting due to action economy.

The last and probably best use is to trick the opponent into believing you do not have mana to pay for the nullify that protects your equipment. This requires a lot (too much imo) calculation and guessing.

I played decoy a few times but stopped long ago.


52
General Discussion / Re: The future of Mage Wars
« on: January 08, 2018, 12:51:58 PM »
oh oh oh.... intercept.... Another reason why you cant kill a mage.
I don't find this to be really the case.
Often times I don't want to work around the angel, I just want to kill it.
If it had 4 dmg already, a single focused strike with your paladin's 5 dice attack (you should have the sword and dawnbreaker's ring out at this point), is often a kill shot.
So many people focus on working around the interceptor, just kill it and your problem is solved in most games.

Perhaps a paladin  Can this with his re roll ability. Rest is nonsense.
No 1 else can kill it effectively.

53
General Discussion / Re: The future of Mage Wars
« on: January 08, 2018, 05:46:25 AM »
oh oh oh.... intercept.... Another reason why you cant kill a mage.

54
General Discussion / Re: The future of Mage Wars
« on: January 08, 2018, 05:10:57 AM »
oh... and catrastrophe 4:
Necromancer.... build in poison immunity.... GREAT IDEA!!!!!!!

55
General Discussion / Re: The future of Mage Wars
« on: January 08, 2018, 05:01:18 AM »
- The game is to long
This I think scare new players off. It looks and feels like a 45 min to 1h game. At least that is what people expect it to be based on their inner comparison with MtG. Now an average game is more like 2h, and that is way to long for this format. At least to attract a larger player pool. Same thing with Academy in fact. It is to long for what it gives. And to be honest MtG does this format much better, why Arena is the way to go for Mage Wars.

I find that the long games are too long. Not the average or even fast games.
Usually (very) the long games are caused by a bad assessment of one of the players within the first 3 rounds.
Can my mage / book go longer than my opponents?

Another reason why games drag out is that its very difficult to 'attack' in this game because guard markers carry over from last round. In its essence it just means that my grizzly takes 2 attacks from his grizzly in the same round i choose to attack his grizzly once.
It took me many many many games before i learned this what you would think is a simple thing... how to open up for attacking.

Some times i wish that the arena somehow was excately 1 zone smaller, in the sense that the distance from starting zones would be 1 less without making the arena smaller. I believe this would make rushes more viable.

- Armor issue
This bullet is very connected to the first one. In my mind armor and defense are two functions that prolong the game in a less desired way. Thematic it is great. But it is frequently seen that both mages and creatures stack a lot of armor which basically neglects 1/3 of all die rolls. This isn't very inspiring for an opponent. On top this is armor stacking very efficient and a good strategy as well. I would say most Armor spells should have been much more expensive.

Armor issue is a disaster. This is probably the biggest flaw in this game. And apparently AW does not understand this which is a catastrophe.
Armor issue has always been there. Since release.

First catastrophe:
Wizard voltaric shield + armor + Passive regeneration.

Second catastrophe:
Druid treebond - or lifebond. Also you can add vinemarkers to this equation since it also slows the game down in the sense that rushing vs a druid is impossible.

And as if lifebond is not completely and insanly overpowered in itself they also added Barkskin.

Third catastrophe:
Veterans Belt. Congratulations... you have now broken Mage Wars.
If i express my self further regarding this card, i will probably be banned from the forums, so ill leave it at this.


- Destructive spells.
Same thinking as with the Armor issue. Every time you design a card that makes something destructive, and removes something from your opponent, you should think twice before releasing it or determine a cost for it because it will only prolong the game in an unfun manner. Spells like: Dispel, Siphone, Mana worm, Enfeeble, etc. These cards should also had been much more expensive.

I think making armor more expensive would fix this one, as it would also make the removal more expensive.
We got ward stones to help vs enchantments, and these actually work when played right. (Early on i thought they were unusable, but they can be great.)
Otherwise you are right.

- Effect issue
There are too many effects! For new people this is a jungle. In one game I tried to explain the difference of Rot and Bleed. They are basically the same, so why make a new version of it? All these tiny rules will act as a huge barrier for new player to get into the game.

I agree. And its not only markers. Hindered, slow, unmoveable, restrained.
oh... and just slam on its own...

- Ability issue
Wow, look at all these cool creature and conjurations abilities! Well, for new players this can be overwhelming. When each creature has its unique ability and none are just vanilla. Sometimes I play with the thought that what if most creatures were standard creatures and abilities came from the Conjurations, Enchantment and Mages?

I don't think that the creatures is the problem. They are learned pretty easy and because they are all cool i have not experienced the time it takes to be a bad investment.

Effects on the other hand....

Also.. learning the attack sequence is too complex in particular in relation to when to reveal what.

- Card pool count
In revers to several others in here I think the card pool is too large. That is at least the impression I get talking to "mugglers". There is no life cycle of cards. The pool just grow and grow and grow. It is even hard for me to keep track of all cards. Maybe a better format how to use the cards is needed?

I think the pool is okay to be honest. I also think its pretty few new spells that actually comes in expansions.
But ofc... over the years it adds up.

- Critical player count
I hope this isn't too late. But one big reason the game doesn't take off more, at least not in my area, is that a game needs a certain player count to grow from. MW had the chance when it was released but never really came up to that critical level when the crowd could bring in new players by itself. Now head hunting for new players are down to just a few dedicated persons globally, which is not enough. I bet one reason AW don't release new content as often for Arena is that for each release the sells figures has gone down down down.

Spot on.

I'm not too concerned about the release schedule. Actually I think it is just fine. What is missing is a clear well communicated plan for it though. Like: "Every year there will be one Arena release in April and one Academy release in November". Here AW must improve.
I guess it all boils down to what type of game and community we would like to have. Are we and AW looking for a prospering community I think the game needs a remake of some sort. Otherwise it will be you guys who are currently playing the game who will keep doing it, no one else unfortunately.

Spot on. 0 and or bad communication is so frustrating.

The introduction of Academy was really poor in my view. Marketing and production quality were ok, but the choice of mages were horrible. I can't understand how a mana-canceling wizard could end up as one of the basic mages in the core box? Why put in a "super advanced" mage whose only purpose is to deny the opponent to do "anything"? When I was demoing this the first year at one of Swedenís larges conventions I got the same comment each time: "The beastmaster was cool, but the Wizard just made the game boring". Note, these were the only two mages available by then. Sure there are several to choose from today, but the train has already left...

So true. AW needs to look up the word 'anticlimax'.
I know that a small pool of players think controlling is fun. But i can assure you that many players will walk away with a very bad taste in the mouth after getting trolled for 3 or 4 hours by an experience undo wizard.

56
Events / Re: ADMW Open 2 - An Open Online Mage Wars Tournament
« on: January 01, 2018, 03:57:20 PM »
Too bad the start date is so far out in the future.
I plan to be far away from computers in April and until July.

57
Spellbook Design and Construction / Re: Feraligatr and Friends - Siren
« on: December 10, 2017, 02:11:18 PM »
remember song of love is unique... only 1 in play per side.

58
Rules Discussion / Re: Equipping a Weapon while having Shield and Wand
« on: November 28, 2017, 04:10:55 PM »
It doesnít matter if swapping makes sense or not.
But Iíll add that no being able to swap seems ridiculous. You can do magic, you can fight, but you cannot swap?
Lol.


AFAIK there is a check when you cast something, that if the slot is  alresdy used then the equipment in that slot is going back.
If thatís the only rule regarding equipment slots, then what I wrote before still stands.

59
Rules Discussion / Re: Equipping a Weapon while having Shield and Wand
« on: November 28, 2017, 03:13:39 PM »
Where is the rule that you must specify a slot?
(I donít remember ever reading it.)

If your not specifying it then the talk about swapping around is irrelevant, as nothing is allocated.


60
Rules Discussion / Re: Equipping a Weapon while having Shield and Wand
« on: November 28, 2017, 01:57:52 PM »
Ehhh.


You donít have to specify what hand a wand goes into.

It goes into either weapon slot or shield slot.
If both are available then your set.

Then you cast nr 2 wand (not same type).
Here your choice is if you want to send first wand back or not.
Usually you donít and keep both.

If you decide the cast a third equipment that can fit into either slot, then you must choose which wand is going back to the spellbook.
And not before this point must you choose or specify what wand is where.

If you replace it with a main hand weapon then you get same choice.

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 70