September 17, 2019, 10:49:42 PM

Author Topic: I feel the temple is overpowered  (Read 8937 times)

reddawn

  • Playtester
  • Sr. Mage
  • *
  • Posts: 463
  • Banana Stickers 10
    • View Profile
Re: I feel the temple is overpowered
« Reply #15 on: July 10, 2013, 03:08:08 PM »
"If a creature is in a zone with one or more enemies with guard markers (except for guards he can ignore; see sidebar), that creature cannot make a melee attack against any object without a guard marker."

Not sure which part of the rules you're reading, but guards do protect conjurations. 

Anyway, you just cannot make sweeping generalization like "oh, Priestess has a ToL, ergo she wins the attrition war."  ToL is far down on the list of why the Priestess makes for a good defensive mage.  If you would have said "her easy access to powerful healing, especially Lay Hands" or "her ability to gain a lot of life at no cost," maybe we could have a discussion about that.  But this hype around Temple of Light is just getting old at this point, and has little basis in reality.
  • Favourite Mage: Arraxian Crown Warlock

piousflea

  • Sr. Mage
  • ****
  • Posts: 435
  • Banana Stickers 2
    • View Profile
Re: I feel the temple is overpowered
« Reply #16 on: July 10, 2013, 03:49:37 PM »
Temple is overpowered but there are not many people who have enough cards to run 3xToL and 6xHoBS. Destroying the temple is never efficient unless your opponent doesn't have additional temples in his deck. Temple's armor and HP are such that it almost always costs more mana and actions to destroy a temple than it does for him to re-cast a new one.

Keep in mind that a strong Temple build doesn't rely on ToL to kill you. HoBS plus melee deals most of the damage, while ToL keeps your biggest creature (or Mage) dazed and inflicts moderate damage.

The most successful anti-temple strategies I have seen are one of these two:
1) Tunnel-vision attack the enemy mage and hope that she dies before you do.
2) Take the fight somewhere out of range of ToL. This depends on ToL placement, as a middle-square position will cover 10 out of 12 zones on the board. A non-middle square position will leave you enough room to fight away from ToL.

reddawn

  • Playtester
  • Sr. Mage
  • *
  • Posts: 463
  • Banana Stickers 10
    • View Profile
Re: I feel the temple is overpowered
« Reply #17 on: July 10, 2013, 05:17:20 PM »
Comparatively, there are much more efficient ways of giving melee dice, armor, and life than Hands.  It's only when you are playing defensively that hands actually pull their weight, because otherwise, I'd much rather have a Bear Strength, Rhino Hide, or Bull Endurance.

Or, of course, your opponent is playing sub-optimally, like what happened at Origins.  But at that point, everything is free game.
  • Favourite Mage: Arraxian Crown Warlock

The Dude

  • Hitchhiker of sorts
  • Playtester
  • Sr. Mage
  • *
  • Posts: 435
  • Banana Stickers 5
  • It's like... good gracious...bodacious.
    • View Profile
Re: I feel the temple is overpowered
« Reply #18 on: July 10, 2013, 09:03:13 PM »
^Completely agree.

ToL Builds are not over powered unless you as the defending player do not go on the aggressive as soon as you see them trying to build temples. Going aggressive is the best strategy against the the temple decks as it forces the opponent to choose between building and dying or switching their plan completely.
  • Favourite Mage: Johktari Beastmaster
Always carry a towel...

Tacullu64

  • Sr. Mage
  • ****
  • Posts: 418
  • Banana Stickers 10
    • View Profile
Re: I feel the temple is overpowered
« Reply #19 on: July 10, 2013, 11:00:43 PM »
^Completely agree.

ToL Builds are not over powered unless you as the defending player do not go on the aggressive as soon as you see them trying to build temples. Going aggressive is the best strategy against the the temple decks as it forces the opponent to choose between building and dying or switching their plan completely.

I couldn't agree more with your statement that ToL builds are not overpowered. However, I'm not sure that ratcheting up the aggression is the answer to every problem. It might be that some builds don't have enough firepower to overcome another builds defenses. You need to first assess your chances of successfully overpowering the priestesses defenses. Remember, that is exactly what builds like the Lord of terror want to do and she handles them pretty well. It might be, that you need to come up with a more disciplined strategy that systematically neutralizes the ToL strategy.

piousflea

  • Sr. Mage
  • ****
  • Posts: 435
  • Banana Stickers 2
    • View Profile
Re: I feel the temple is overpowered
« Reply #20 on: July 10, 2013, 11:21:16 PM »
Comparatively, there are much more efficient ways of giving melee dice, armor, and life than Hands.  It's only when you are playing defensively that hands actually pull their weight, because otherwise, I'd much rather have a Bear Strength, Rhino Hide, or Bull Endurance.

Or, of course, your opponent is playing sub-optimally, like what happened at Origins.  But at that point, everything is free game.

This is not true. 2x Bear strength would be twice as mana efficient as 4x HoBS except that you cannot stack 2 bear strengths. If for whatever reason your mage is unable to attack for a round, 2 bear strengths on your mage are useless that round, while 4 HoBS can add armor or healing instead.

Please keep in mind that 100% of the Origins builds were super aggressive agro. Aggro is not a counter to the temple/hand build. In fact, Hand strat was designed specifically to counter other agro builds, and it performs very well in that role.

reddawn

  • Playtester
  • Sr. Mage
  • *
  • Posts: 463
  • Banana Stickers 10
    • View Profile
Re: I feel the temple is overpowered
« Reply #21 on: July 11, 2013, 12:30:34 AM »
Comparatively, there are much more efficient ways of giving melee dice, armor, and life than Hands.  It's only when you are playing defensively that hands actually pull their weight, because otherwise, I'd much rather have a Bear Strength, Rhino Hide, or Bull Endurance.

Or, of course, your opponent is playing sub-optimally, like what happened at Origins.  But at that point, everything is free game.

1. This is not true. 2x Bear strength would be twice as mana efficient as 4x HoBS except that you cannot stack 2 bear strengths. If for whatever reason your mage is unable to attack for a round, 2 bear strengths on your mage are useless that round, while 4 HoBS can add armor or healing instead.

2. Please keep in mind that 100% of the Origins builds were super aggressive agro. Aggro is not a counter to the temple/hand build. In fact, Hand strat was designed specifically to counter other agro builds, and it performs very well in that role.

1. Other than the fact that 1 Bear Strength is more efficient mana and action-wise than 2 Hands, this entire point is totally irrelevant because there are many ways of increasing you dice count after Bear Strength is down, such as Power Strike, Marked for Death, Battle Fury..the list goes on. 

The only way your logic works would be if Bear Strength was the only card outside of Hands that can increase dice count...but if you have the game, you immediately know that that isn't true.

And you're highly over-exaggerating Hand's utility.  A smart player is going to save the QC Bear Strength for a creature that can assuredly get value from it, just like with the Hand before an activation and it's not like Hand is always getting you value.  You might be left with no good choice and it goes to waste.  I don't see your point.

2. I'm sorry, but If you think that playing 4-6 Hands, which is as much or more mana (20-30!!) than some of the most powerful threats in the game, somehow counters aggro, your understanding of aggro strategies is fundamentally flawed.  Your battle report about Origins in which you describe how you played against the temple build reinforces my assertion, because you spent 18 playing a Hellion and an Imp, neither of which are aggro creatures at all, and that's only what I know about.

Maybe if you had summoned Adramelech and two Dark Pact Slayers and flung attack spells all game and then failed to beat that build I'd be concerned.  But obviously, that's not the case, nor would it be, nor has it been in my experience, and the playtesters (y'know, the people responsible for balancing the game) see the same results as I do.
« Last Edit: July 11, 2013, 12:36:18 AM by reddawn »
  • Favourite Mage: Arraxian Crown Warlock

Shad0w

  • Playtester
  • Legendary Mage
  • *
  • Posts: 2934
  • Banana Stickers 0
    • View Profile
Re: I feel the temple is overpowered
« Reply #22 on: July 11, 2013, 01:02:51 AM »
For us to see what was the optimal line of play we need the full list Pious played. Looking back in hind site will do nobody any good until we get all the data.
"Darth come prove to meet you are worthy of the fighting for your school in the arena and not just another scholar to be discarded like an worn out rag doll"


Quote: Shad0w the Arcmage

DeckBuilder

  • Playtester
  • Legendary Mage
  • *
  • Posts: 666
  • Banana Stickers 3
    • View Profile
Re: I feel the temple is overpowered
« Reply #23 on: July 11, 2013, 01:33:57 AM »
"If a creature is in a zone with one or more enemies with guard markers (except for guards he can ignore; see sidebar), that creature cannot make a melee attack against any object without a guard marker."

Not sure which part of the rules you're reading, but guards do protect conjurations. 

Anyway, you just cannot make sweeping generalization like "oh, Priestess has a ToL, ergo she wins the attrition war."  ToL is far down on the list of why the Priestess makes for a good defensive mage.  If you would have said "her easy access to powerful healing, especially Lay Hands" or "her ability to gain a lot of life at no cost," maybe we could have a discussion about that.  But this hype around Temple of Light is just getting old at this point, and has little basis in reality.

It's under "Ignoring Guards" sidebar (p29), the exceptions to the rule that you quote:

"Guards affect a flying creature when it makes a melee attack, but only if it is attacking a non-Flying CREATURE in the guard's zone."

The game is very precise in its terminology and if it meant for you to be able to protect Conjurations, it would have said "Objects" instead.

I viewed this rule as an (much-needed) advantage to paying the cost-premium of Flyers and an (equally much needed) disadvantage to relying on guarding key conjurations.

Hence why non-Warlocks having Samandriel in their spell book is an elegant solution to suspected ToL + HoB (and which Priestess won't run them?).
« Last Edit: July 11, 2013, 03:07:43 AM by DeckBuilder »
It's all fun and games until someone loses an eye. And then it's just fun.

DeckBuilder

  • Playtester
  • Legendary Mage
  • *
  • Posts: 666
  • Banana Stickers 3
    • View Profile
Re: I feel the temple is overpowered
« Reply #24 on: July 11, 2013, 02:18:52 AM »
Sorry to resuscitate this old chestnut: I was just proffering my own solutions to ToL + HoB which was asked by the previous poster who was saying "nobody actually gives specific strategies to combat ToL, just generic dismissal that it isn't overpowered."

As for where I stand on this, I think ToL can be circumvented by experienced or even tactics-savvy players who have strategised for that contingency with sideboard cards in their toolbox.

Even then, it becomes a bit too much of a lottery with the ToL effect die and any defence die you adopt to counter it: let's be honest, the d12 is the big random element in the game. Being hit by that stun so early in the game is too much of a tempo loss when Temple Crawl is being piloted well.

However, the existence of Temple of Light damages the game because it is instantly PERCEIVED by new players (like my local meta where I remain unbeaten as latecomer learner) as overpowered. If players are willing to add the word Epic to ToL and are still be happy to play Priestess, then surely there is no harm in such an errata?

New players are saddened when they see what seems to be a broken card because

(a) it costs so much more to than 9 mana to destroy an 8/3 ToL, only for another to then spring up; l this not a "generalised" but a specific example of why the Priestess adopting this strategy should win a war of resource attrition. As that strategy is so dull, making it Epic solves this and improves the game.

(b) it is (like HoB) a NON-ACTION: so it's like having a second Quickcast marker that hits 10/12 squares with 4 dice daze/stun no immunities except 1 creature. The ability to string extra free actions before or after to get a longer sequence of effects is huge. Why did they make it a non-action?

ToL (with cheap HoB support) is a turn-off when trying to convert new players to commit to this great game because of PERCEPTION. Ergo it is bad for the game without an errata,

My (unsatisfactory) solutions are:
> (going first) sprint NC then QC Battle Forge FC to deny that key zone
> (going second) sprint NC then QC blocking wall, turn 2 cast Samandriel
As a warlock playing second, I would cast Vampiress instead as she can fly over the wall and bypass guards to attack ToL for 1 mana.

But the very fact that I have specifically come up with openings against Priestess because of 1 card that I fear, that is an indication that ToL seems overpowered to new players who will be put off by the game.

Hey, what other card has created so much feeling and so much debate? Something is wrong here, if only being a turn-off for recruiting fresh blood, and to for one poster to indirectly call Piousflea (a major turnament winner) a poor player because he did not cope with it at the Origins final (albeit an unlucky early stun) is an indication of how flawed the "not overpowered" camp arguments are.

Let's be clear: I am only proposing that Temple of Light becomes Epic like Mordok's Obelisk and Suppression Orb which are game defining conjurations. This will prevent the EXTREMELY DULL attrition strategy that any Priestess with access to 4 copies of ToL and 6 copies of HoB (as well as aforementioned Epics against Swarm) should build currently. When there's an optimal build for 1 mage, it causes all other mages to compulsory toolbox against it and 1 card is a turn-off for new players because it (alone in Mage Wars) stinks of "buy more to become more powerful so wallet buys win rate", then there is a problem gentlemen.

I will also add that, once ToL is errata'd Epic, there is no HoB problem. I appreciate that Arcane Wonders is a business and it is fine for them to cater to obsessives who want 6 copies of it (atking into account their fragility to be one-shotted by buffed Bigs). HoB is not the luck-orientated life-sapping Laser that ToL is.

I really hope designers read this forum and heed arguments for an Epic errata. As I am very new to the game (very experienced at others including its influences) but I really LOVE this FUN game, a great balance between intuitive simplicity, tactical depth and strategic planning, with randomness to test adaptability and anticipating opponent moves for bluffing. Well done, designers, on a great game. While over-costed cards will just become obsolete and under-costed cards can be nerfed in future expansions (e.g. Dispelling Wand vs. Bear Strength etc), I see no other solution for ToL except to make it Epic so that the strategy can't over-focus as it relies on 1 copy. There is no shame in making that 1 small errata, changing ToL Unique to Epic.
« Last Edit: July 11, 2013, 03:07:01 AM by DeckBuilder »
It's all fun and games until someone loses an eye. And then it's just fun.

jacksmack

  • Legendary Mage
  • *****
  • Posts: 1068
  • Banana Stickers 19
    • View Profile
Re: I feel the temple is overpowered
« Reply #25 on: July 11, 2013, 03:19:10 AM »
@ deckbuilder:

Protect the Zone: If a creature is in a zone with one
or more enemies with guard markers (except for guards
he can ignore; see sidebar), that creature cannot make a
melee attack against any object without a guard marker

The wording for flying creatures is to explain that flying may melee attack flying even though there is guards.
It cannot attack conjurations if there is enemy guards in the zone.

Cosworth

  • New Mage
  • *
  • Posts: 22
  • Banana Stickers 0
    • View Profile
Re: I feel the temple is overpowered
« Reply #26 on: July 11, 2013, 05:25:15 AM »
Deckbuilder is right. ToL should be made epic.

reddawn

  • Playtester
  • Sr. Mage
  • *
  • Posts: 463
  • Banana Stickers 10
    • View Profile
Re: I feel the temple is overpowered
« Reply #27 on: July 11, 2013, 08:46:30 AM »
For us to see what was the optimal line of play we need the full list Pious played. Looking back in hind site will do nobody any good until we get all the data.

I sincerely doubt we're going to get all the data.  And what data we already have access to indicates 18 wasted mana.  You don't have to be an exceptional MW player to know that wasting 18 mana will easily lose you the game.
  • Favourite Mage: Arraxian Crown Warlock

Tacullu64

  • Sr. Mage
  • ****
  • Posts: 418
  • Banana Stickers 10
    • View Profile
Re: I feel the temple is overpowered
« Reply #28 on: July 11, 2013, 10:37:27 AM »
I have yet to hear a legitimate reason as to why ToL is OP.  Because new players perceive it to be, is not a valid concern. If you are introducing someone new to the game don't use ToL until you think they can handle it.

As to other cards beginners perceive as OP, how about Battle Fury. Imagine you're playing your first game. You have played 8 - 10 turns. Sure you are down to 14 life on your mage, but you actually got your opponent down to 22 life. This is a lot of fun, we got a lot of back and forth action going. You may be down but you're holding your own, then your opponent pulls out BF and deals 14 damage before you even new you were in danger of losing to a single mage activation. Yeah, that's great for the game. Lets nerf BF too. I have a better idea, lets not. Why don't we give people a chance to learn the intracies of the game. Mage Wars is a complex game with a steep learning curve. That is a positive in my book and I am sure it may be a negative for others. Nerfing and banning cards is always a negative thing even when it is necessary, which it is not in this case.

Two of the three big tournaments were won by Warlocks ergo the warlock is OP. He must be, he wins 66% of the tournaments. It is obvious he is not, we don't have enough data to support that assertion yet. Or maybe he is just really popular and his winning percentage can be attributed to the number of people playing warlocks.

The reason I don't give specific suggestions to countering ToL is because of the very nature of MW. Mage Wars is not Magic the Gathering. There are no Day of Judgement cards to reset the game or swing it in your favor. Even if a player has a big turn it is not because of a single powerful card. It is because of the decisions he made in previous turns that put him in a situation to benefit from a big turn. You win based on your strategy(s), the tactics you employ to implement your strategies, and your ability to adapt when your opponent's strategy is dominant. If the ToL has you down your solution depends on your mage, the cards you have in your spellbook (which determines the type of counter strategies you can implement), the state of the game at the moment, and your ability to second guess your opponent. Mage Wars is a game where you have many choices to make. That means you have a lot of chances to screw up and a lot of chances to look like a genius.  If you ever run into a strategy you weren't prepared for it could easily feel like your opponent is using broken cards. For me to offer specific advice I would need to be looking over your shoulder as the game unfolds and see what choices you have before you.
« Last Edit: July 11, 2013, 10:41:47 AM by Tacullu64 »

Fentum

  • Sr. Mage
  • ****
  • Posts: 353
  • Banana Stickers 2
    • View Profile
Re: I feel the temple is overpowered
« Reply #29 on: July 11, 2013, 11:23:23 AM »

Here is some specific advice.

Don't wear white underpants.

More people in car crashes wear white undergarments than any other colour. Ergo wearing white undergarments is more likely to cause you to be involved in a car crash.