July 12, 2020, 01:51:29 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.

Messages - gerni

Pages: [1] 2
No Dota players here?  ::)

Some ideas working with sleep, but also affecting the enemy mage:

When Nightmare is in play, ending sleep inflicts 3 dice of direct damage to the creature that ends the sleep.

When sleep is ended through any attack, the sleep condition changes onto the attacker (If the creature cannot receive sleep, it gets dazed).

As a quick action, Nightmare can end sleep without any of the above effects (as well as the Daze condition).

As a full action, Nightmare can flip the action marker of a non-mage (enemy?) creature in its zone.


General Discussion / Re: Dominate the Arena: Galaxxus
« on: June 02, 2015, 01:03:55 AM »
Conquering works normally, but to recast it,  you need to also control an orb in an adjacent zone as stated on the card. Also, i imagine it can be hard to get rid of guards/creatures in a zone with an orb, so conquering is not as easy.

Spellbook Design and Construction / Re: Charlotte area Necromancer
« on: May 28, 2015, 11:05:56 AM »
The thing is, you don't absolutely have to cast two, or even one a turn if tactics call for it. The mana return you get from the spawn points is still there. If you can't shape the game to keep yourself protected, (didn't put on the cloak, armor, set up a wall, use your zombies to attack inbound enemies, etc) the spawn points allow freedom of movement until you get forced to commit to an action and will likely still be there next turn with more mana on them. Take a breather and cast drain life on something attacking you, wall yourself off, or whatever you think will stop the current issue.

The thing is, I don't see this book being able to "stop the current issue" in case of a rushing mage. You have two sources of armor, only one dissolve and no acid balls to get rid of enemy armor. In my experience you would simply lose the damage race against armor stacking opponents or mages with inherent defensive abilities, such as Wizard, Druid or Forcemaster that attack + attack spell, or attack with spells twice (the rushmaster being an extreme example). The only option i see, may be hiding behind walls.

As a side note, i think Libro + Harmonize is not a good combination, since Disolve is so effective against it.

This is just my point of view and it is not my intention to sound harsh :) . My local meta seems to be completely different from yours, so take what i said with a grain of salt.

Spellbook Design and Construction / Re: Charlotte area Necromancer
« on: May 28, 2015, 05:09:52 AM »
The problem I see when playing two (creature) spawn points:
  • slow setup (takes lots of actions)
  • expensive setup (lots of mana)
  • expensive if you want to use it every round
  • if you use all spawn points every round, your mage has limited mana to act flexible

Now, that holds for every mage. The Necro is special, since he has two creature spawn points. A zombie Necro is even more special, because he has no reliable guards  and interceptors(since bloodthirsty and/or pest) plus the Necro has no inherent defense (well he is immune to poison) which makes him weak to direct attacks. So you have to spend actions to brace yourself (hehe). In my opinion you simply can not achieve that properly with a two spawn point setup since you don't have the mana. What i  can see working is a forge/creature spawn point and a meditation amulet.

Spellbook Design and Construction / Re: The Johktari RUSHmaster
« on: January 29, 2015, 12:33:39 PM »
I also thought about playing a 'delayed economy' style. All these discussions about 'does it pay off?' (see Mana crystal efficiency thread) suggest playing economy as early as possible, since there is the biggest possible distance between the mages (little threat). I wonder if early aggression or early defensive plays with backup economy can be stronger in some cases. Have to try it, I guess.

My primary mage is the Priestess and my first turn tends to be Mana Crystal and Guardian Angel, my second turn tends to be Brace Yourself and Guardian Angel and my third turn tends to be Mana Crystal and Moonglow Amulet.  After that, I tend to pop out a Knight of Westlock or Royal Archer each turn after that.

That's interesting. I've never built a book around the mage casting creatures (unless it is only 2-3), I always have the feeling of being super behind in actions versus spawnpoints. No time for equipment, dispels, enchants etc, but versus the Rushmaster i think it is a strong opening.

I tend to use a GA in almost every book (i think it is op) to force actions/mana to get rid of her intercept, while i focus on dispel/dissolve to then finish the game within 2-3 rounds, when the enemy runs out of defensive spells. These kind of books are built to have always more armor (and vets belt or defense) than the enemy (forge or druid). I found that it is very hard to do serious damage to these kind of builds with creatures, since there are so little with piercing. Plus they are decent against aggro builds like the Rushmaster.

General Discussion / Re: Is mage wars losing popularity?
« on: January 26, 2015, 02:31:38 PM »
I know you know this, but it is Mage Wars! I have seen this comment above raised as an issue or  complaint about the game multiple times. I am never sure what/how players want AW to change things when the goal of 100% of the games is to kill the opposing Mage.

Well, i wouldn't have a problem with that but it renders things like Veteran or Wounded Prey completly useless since - AHA - you will not kill creatures anyways. You either ignore them, make your enemy pay for them or get a guard and/or defense.

Come out on OCTGN and play there you will see almost all of the Mages played to win there. I am not saying that some are not weaker than the others (like my poor Priest) but even then, when well played, he can win and yes the dice then matter more but it sure beats rolling through a deck waiting to draw that one card that will win me game.

I play on OCTGN so that's part of the experience i am talking about. I also like rolling dice more than having to depend on drawing a card (in the end it is the same - playing with probability, it is part of deckbuilding). But it is frustrating if you want to make some mages work and in the end they can only win if you roll better or the other player makes mistakes. As negative as this may sound, I enjoy playing the game a lot, but i think criticism (when constructive) should be offered and is a good thing.

Spellbook Design and Construction / Re: The Great Mage Balancing Act
« on: January 26, 2015, 07:00:54 AM »
To most of your questions, my answer is: depends on how your enemy build her/his book. Not very satisfying, eh?

What does everyone think is the right number for each type of effect and which ones are the strongest?  Also, how much does it hurt a mage to be using the less powerful version of an effect, like an orchid or explode instead of a dissolve?

Well the specific solutions like explode and orchid are the more powerful, since the have an additional effect, but i know what you mean. From my experience, the simplest solutions to a task, namely: dissolve, dispel, teleport, force push, nullify and rhino hide do not have alternatives from an efficiency point of view, which leads to not so diverse books.

Even after getting more of the staple cards, the plan is for each Mage to have only 1 Teleport and 1 Force Push to prevent the teleporting from getting out of hand.  Will this invalidate certain strategies or make other strategies too strong or do you think that things will balance out in the end?

It certainly limits strategies, like pit plays, pushing enemies through walls of thorns for example. It also limits you when playing against guards.

In my group, we put small paper sheets as proxies in our spellbooks. Before the game, we simply put the real cards in the book we want to play.

General Discussion / Re: Is mage wars losing popularity?
« on: January 26, 2015, 06:31:10 AM »
Well, there are strategies which certainly are more dependent on dice rolls than others and games can therefore be decided by rolls (imagine an "all in" style like e.g. Rushmaster, rolling blanks on two boulders). But that is part of the strategy and you have to be aware of the probability to fail with this kind of play.

But some points the reddit OP mentions i do share (and i played a lot of MW games). If you play for fun in the sense that you play thematic books, without putting too much thoughts into your books and try to optimize - briefly speaking without any competitive ambitions - MW is perfectly fine. Now, if you try build maximized books you'll find a huge number of cards every mage absolutely has to have. For some cards, there are no alternatives, which makes some mages intrinsically inferior compared to others (because the pay more for these cards or have less of them) which can be a source of frustration. Did you ever try to make a cool strategy on a lesser played mage work and then recognized that the other mage is just better in almost every aspect? Happens to me a lot.

It's leading to a small pool of mages being played and a small variety of cards being used and finally in a small variety of strategies. For example, I can safely say that over 90% of our games are finished without more than one or two creatures being killed, since focusing the mage is just more efficient. I think the game would profit - and that is a point the reddit OP also states - from more mage exclusive solutions to common threads/problems (e.g. getting rid of armor, dispelling/countering enchantments, gain/deny mobility).

Therefore, I can understand some points mentioned in the reddit post, but I'm optimistic - I think some points exist because the card pool is simply not big enough yet.

Spellbook Design and Construction / Re: Forcemaster Control
« on: December 30, 2014, 09:41:49 AM »
I only played a couple of games with the FM lately, but I might contribute to the discussion.

Firstly, I can #2 Schwenkgott: Since you are the only threat to the enemy mage, I is quite action efficient to cripple you with enchantments or Stranglevine/Tanglevine. You absolutely have to have enough spells to get rid of these shutdowns. I would take more Dispels and a Dispel Wand and a second Purify.

Then, you have no armor. Relying on the defense and Forcefield (so expensive) is very dicey. With Knockdown, Tangle/Stranglevine, Falcon Precision there are so many options to get around Defense. I'd recommend going for the leather stuff and a proper chest.

About mana denial: You invest so much resources (mana and spellbook wise) that I don't think the FM is the right mage to play this style. As ACG said, the wizard can use these tools to greater efficiency.

That being said, I think one can play the FM as a control late game mage. But I think it is more efficient to control space and deny creature heavy play.

Spellbook Design and Construction / Re: Plant control build
« on: December 17, 2014, 10:43:09 AM »
Well, pumping out creatures from the Druid herself is very action inefficient. You lose so many advantages whitout Vine Tree:
  • you can't move the round you play a creature
  • you need an action to spawn a creature
  • you need an action to play the discount ring
  • you don't have the option to create multiple Vine markers (hinder!)
  • no options to Tanglevine/Stranglevine/Orchid/... from Vine Tree

So when going Plant heavy, I see no reason not to play Vine Tree.

Let me clarify on Regenerations and what i meant with "overkill". I don't think you need so many regernation sources in your spellbook, since Barkskin has the Cantrip trait. There is no creature besides your mage on which you want to cast Regrowth. Via Tree Bond, your mage has "2 regeneration" anyways. If you need more, because you are under heavy fire, you want to keep Barkskin up anyways. Regeneration does not stack and the enemy cannot get rid of your Barkskin, hence putting in so much regeneration is spellpoint ineffective. One belt or a single regrowth is more than enough.

I already have 3x dispel so think it would be a waste off spellpoints.
3 dispel can be enough, in my local group though, you would be plain dead if you have only 3 of them (Curselock, Forcemaster, Fellella BM or Druid, Priestess) either because you die to curses and Poisoned Blood or you can't handle huge buffed Creatures (esp. flyers).

Personally I think orchid and lotus are awesome because it gives me free action, ranged attacks with unavoidable trait and there is many creatures out there that might come in very handy.
Since you don't have a Vine Tree to deploy them, I think casting one of these sets you behind even more. Your play will be so static and using one or two Walls blocking away your Plants will leave half of your army standing around useless.

I didn't include minor heal or wand of healing because regrowth is a cheaper also I have geyser.
Geyser only removes burns. Tainted, bleeding (with poisoned blood), Stun, Cripple ... how do remove them?

The only time agony is really useful is against forcemasters but as the Druid I do not fear any.
Ok... (Hydra, Adramelech, Corazin,...)

Don't get me wrong, I don't want to talk down your book. But my experience (~15 Druid games) let me move away from a book in the style of yours.

Regards, Gerni

Spellbook Design and Construction / Re: Plant control build
« on: December 17, 2014, 08:17:44 AM »
I think you forgot to include the Vine Tree.

Also, I think at least one Nullify and Force Push and a Creature without fire weakness are mandatory. Personally, I don't like Orchid/Lotus, since the attack is easy to dodge and the Dissolve/Sleep is too expensive. I'd rather take 6 dissolves. Regrowth and 2x Regrowth Belt is overkill. Regrowth is only worthy on your Mage, since all your creatures have Regeneration. If you need more Regeneration than that of your Tree Bond you are under heavy fire and want to keep Barkskin up anyways.

Spells to consider
- Minor Heal
- Force Push
- Wand of Healing   
- Defend
- Agony (so strong!)
- Maim Wings

I also noticed, that plants only are really hard to play. They are cost efficient early and fall off quickly due to their low mobility and their lack of armor. They are excellent to build up pressure but to keep them alive you have to invest lots of actions (the only option I like is using Brace yourself) and it is often not worth it - so I tend to use them to pressure and - if focused - let them die.

Spellbook Design and Construction / Re: Tinker Bells Angel
« on: November 20, 2014, 02:06:34 PM »
@Coshade: I don't know if Charmyna is active at the moment. If you want to get a glimpse of how his general games go, I'd recommend his Twitch.tv channel. There are plenty of full games with commentary.

You will notice that lots of games (which also happens in my local meta) come down to dispell and dissolve wars. 4 of both - dispell and dissolve - is the minimum amount I have in EVERY book. The druid gets cheap dissolves, that is why it's easy to implement 6.

Let me also say somethink about the other points you asked, allthough I don't have the competence of Charmyna :)

Do you have an ideal armor pont you like to get too? I am looking at the leather boots and gloves and am unsure of when you are going to be able to cast it. Do you find time to cast it in the later end of the game? How many turns do you usually see when playing this build?

The natural way to get armor in this book is via enchantments, since you can move them around and you can use felella to cast them. I'm quite sure that an early Rhino Hide is the way to go before casting boots and gloves.

I am wondering if you took out some for more nullifys it would help defend your enchantments more, especially with 5 enchantment transfusions.

Well, one aspect of this book is certainly to trade actions efficiently. If the enemy invests in destroying you enchantments, you trade your familiars actions vs their mages, which is fine. Also, transfusion can be used to save enchantments (and again, it is an action felella can do for you).

How do you deal with high armor things? I guess the piercing just doesn't seem like enough to me.....

The times I played this book (style), I went for the mage only. And you have plenty stuff to get rid of armor on the mage (dissolve x6, dispell x 4).

I was wondering what you thought about heals? I know you have healing charm and regrowth and that combos with saving mana. Is the heal spell not worth it?

You can transfer health via treebond, you have armor and regeneration via enchantments and you can cast healing charm via felella or with enchanters ring discount from the mage... :)

Spellbook Design and Construction / Re: Tinker Bells Angel
« on: November 04, 2014, 04:23:05 PM »
At the risk of going slightly off topic: I'm really thinking a lot these days about why Guardian Angel is so cheap to cast. Inherent flying, in my opinion, is one of the best traits in the game. Comparing the GA to other flyers in the 12 mana region, namely Gray Angel, Blood Demon, Gargoyle Sentry or Screech Harpy (which i did not test), it seems to be superior in (almost) every situation, having Aegis, Defense (plus she can heal herself). I think that's a really pity, since it reduces diversity a lot.

On topic: Could you think of another creature that can act as a enchantment carrier for this book?

... Its the cheap creature mana cost + high dice + regeneration that makes the Druid so hard to kill.

That's true for the early game. But plants die fast if you don't commit to keep them alive. Also, plants don't offer a lot of mobility. I have no experience as Warlord but I'd either try to get my own walls up vs 'snatch pit' and use  Ludwig Boltstorm or other range attacks with the Archer's Watchtower, or I'd use an intercepting guard to cover my range if i don't have a wall myself. Also, there are some creatures with tough trait which also could be considered versus snatch. And there is also Iron Golem (I used him last time i played a druid).

In general Druids suffer versus flying creatures (esp. Guardian Angel) and mobile creatures (with defense). In my group, most of the books have a distinct gameplan vs. 'pit plays' which is why I completly went away from playing the snatchgame (as primary gameplan). Don't get me wrong, the strategy is nice but it is very predictable.

At first glance (didn't dive too much in FiF) the Warlord to me seems better without a Barracks. But that might just be my playstile. I am slowly moving away from creature spawnpoints with other mages too. Even the Vine Tree I use more and more to just control Guards with Tanglevines and additional Vinemarkers instead of creatures.

Spellbook Design and Construction / Re: Deep Roots, a druid build
« on: October 19, 2014, 06:20:27 AM »
The ideas is again to use many plant creatures to slowly dominate the board.

Thats funny because it is the opposite of what worked for me so far :). Without really committing to keep plants alive via enchantments, they die pretty fast mid to late game. In my opinions they shine early, where the enemy has low armor and the mana/dice ratio on plants is unbeatable. 

Pages: [1] 2