September 18, 2020, 10:00:37 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 - Myrddin

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5
Strategy and Tactics / Re: On: Openings
« on: July 10, 2014, 10:55:07 AM »
My experience is pretty limited but against some very good opponents (they play a lot but i don't get to play much) so don't take the "attacking turn 3 is to early" thing as fact, I just haven't been able to make it work. If you do the turn 1 lair in FC, falcon attacking turn 3 thing does your opponent not already have a creature ready to defend or shoot your falcon turn 3 as well?  It seems like you are giving up an action or two moving while your opponent can meet you creature for creature and all other things being equal you've given up two actions for no gain.  Things like iron golam and devouring ooze are used a lot in my meta so charging forward is just playing into your opponents hands.

In regards to the double knight plan, did your opponent move forward? If you summon a creature turn 1 your opponent should be staying in his starting corner to force you to come to him.
Well, it depends! If you have initiative turn 1 you can attack as your first action turn 3, so they only have a guard ready if they summoned it turn 1. Iron Golem is just a crazy good creature, but against strong, slow guards I'd teleport them away (or better still, push them through a thorn wall)

The underlying point is that a Lair opening (often followed up with enchantment ring) is pretty good economy-wise: so if they focus on defences, you can start to build up an advantage over them on mana/creatures. That's why I consider it a midrange approach. My forcemaster friend doesn't use that much mana as he's too busy hitting people: he'd just teleport you away, or mind control your guard if it was living. And then when his mana built up summon a big friend (bear, Adramalech...) a few turns in.

Strategy and Tactics / Re: On: Openings
« on: July 10, 2014, 07:47:37 AM »
I generally have two planned openings.  One against aggressive and one for against passive opponents.  If my opening is very aggressive then I theoretically would only have the one plan, but I personally don't like hyper aggressive strategies. 

Any plan that starts attacking before turn 4 seems to fall apart against a competent opponent.

Also, I for any conjuration heavy book like one that uses a spawnpoint I have a special plan against druids because druids punish immobility.
This is a very interesting statement (the bold bit): how large/varied is your group? Because I get the impression from these forums that the opposite certainly used to be the case: any build that was so slow it wasn't attacking by turn 4 was probably doomed to quick aggro. Druid etc. obviously benefit a defensive play, but I'm still surprised by this claim.

My own experience is only with 2 opponents, a forcemaster who tends to play cheetah speed, run and summon Galvitar, and a Necromancer who tends to cast Death Ring and Libro Mortus in his home corner. I'm the mid-range player with a Beastmaster who can advance while summoning, sometimes uses a Lair but often just relies on rings. But even with my 'mid-range' approach, I'm still often attacking necromancer with a pet falcon on my third turn...

Strategy and Tactics / Re: On: Openings
« on: July 09, 2014, 01:46:23 PM »
Arlemus - Check it out!  There is a new thread going for specific openings as a corollary to this one. 

I did have a question related to this though.

I'm a big football fan (American football, though I like futbol too  :P) and I know that some coaches like to script their first few plays while others prefer a blank slate and will base their play calling on the tempo of the game.  I think that in this regard, Mage Wars is very similar.  Personally, I don't like to pre-script turns as I feel it removes some of the artistry and flexibility away from my decision making, but it seems there are others who really like to have a 2-3 turn template they start the game with almost every time.  Where do you fall on this spectrum and why?
I doubt many 3-turn templates survive contact with the enemy. Even 2-turn templates might not if the opponent goes hard aggro (or possibly if they go hard economy, e.g. a spawnpoints+meditation amulet opening).

What I do like is to know some early options. For instance, if my Johktari drops a harmonised Lair on the far centre first turn (a favourite attack on campers), I like to know what I can do that lets me keep summoning animals etc and still have just enough mana for a bow: I don't want to be one short.

There had better be dinosaurs in future selves. If raptors can spit acid I want a lightning shooting pterodactyl and of course fire spewing t-rex. I will love him, and Pet him, and name him George ;D
Bad time to point out that pterodactyls aren't dinosaurs?

*Goes and hides in the pedantry shed*

3. Panda bears. Best way to go. Nobody is going to see this coming. That or a Frost Immune Polar Bear.
Not sure Pandas are bears. Mind you, dinosaurs aren't lizards and spiders aren't insects!

I was hoping for a 'Lost bear cub'. 5-mana creature with 3 dice attack, lumbering, pest. If your opponent hurts a hair on its head you get to instantly summon its mama (steelclaw grizzly) for free.

According to the mighty "Wikipedia" the Giant Panda is in fact a bear. I was kinda shocked. Granted the Red Panda is unrelated to the Giant Panada, being more closely related to Weasels than Bears.

Did you mean that dinosaurs aren't reptiles? Going back that far in time it's tough to say what they classify as other than Dinosaurs. I'm sure we could go back and forth on that.

I know that spiders are not insects. That one is pretty ironclad. However, from a game standpoint when you want the possibility in the future of a mage focusing on "arthropods" it's easier to just call everything and insect than to put "arthropod" on a card. But that's part of the problem with "animals" in general. By pure science the beastmaster should have a fair bit more animals, but part of our clarifications are based on aspects of the game world and ease of reference.

Sorry to any zoologists out there who are offended by our loose classifications.
Oh, I completely agree with the way MageWars classifies things in practice. Although my brother is very sad about the spitting raptor classification: the fact it isn't labelled 'dinosaur' means he doesn't expect to see many other dinosaurs popping up, and he was really hoping for a T-Rex pet.

3. Panda bears. Best way to go. Nobody is going to see this coming. That or a Frost Immune Polar Bear.
Not sure Pandas are bears. Mind you, dinosaurs aren't lizards and spiders aren't insects!

I was hoping for a 'Lost bear cub'. 5-mana creature with 3 dice attack, lumbering, pest. If your opponent hurts a hair on its head you get to instantly summon its mama (steelclaw grizzly) for free.

Spellbook Design and Construction / Re: Blood Wolves
« on: June 22, 2014, 03:34:53 AM »
I've been opening with Lair, sometimes Harmonized, with the placement depending on my opponent. Against a more passive opponent I'll generally place it in FC. This allows me to put them under pressure quickly, and allows me to summon creatures into the zone I'll want to be standing on if they stay in their start corner. Against an aggressive opening, I'll generally put it in NC, and try to keep it between me and my opponent in order to maximize the benefit of hindering.

I've gone back and forth on including Mana Flowers. Mana Flowers allow me greater diversity in opening options, and would allow me to summon out of the Lair more frequently without wasting my mage's actions, but at the expense of slowing down the pressure I can put my opponent under if I'm going to use the Lair.

I've also been debating changing the creature mix a little bit.

Maybe something like

Creatures (24) [8]

1 Galador, Protector of Straywood (5)
3 Dire Wolf (9)
2 Spitting Raptor (6)
2 Timber Wolf (4)

That would save me a few points for extra utility, and give me a cheaper creature option.
I find I get most bang for my buck out of Lair when I can summon smaller creatures out of it. Being able to put down a Lair FC and then summon foxes, cats and falcons is incredible. The fast creatures can attack even a completely camping opponent, and it's quite common for an opponent with initiative to advance a single square in one direction or the other, meaning that you can drop a Lair at their feet and then use it to summon a bobcat, rouse it, and get a 4-dice attack on them on the second turn. If they run from your cat, it gets more dice, if they stay you get them pinned down to shoot at. And its dodge makes swinging at it somewhat unreliable. Opening against a squishy wizard can be something like

Turn 1: double move, Lair FC, harmonise it (0 mana left)
Turn 2: (9 mana, 3 on Lair): summon cat (2), rouse (1), attack with it. If they stay in the square, bear strength on self and go and join the attack. In case they don't, prepare something else (Ring of Enchantments, Hawkeye and armour are all good).

Falcons are particularly good in my experience against the (zombie) necromancer, as most of his troops can't guard...

General Discussion / Re: Card spoilers so far.
« on: June 18, 2014, 09:21:51 AM »
Thinking about Disarm more, I think that I'll like it for mages that have specific equipment that they need to shut down in order to land damage, such as the Adramelech Warlock shutting down Dragonscale Hauberk or Elemental Cloak. It's a much safer play than Dissolve if they have a face down enchantment that could be a Nullify or Reverse Magic, it's cheap, and it has better range than Dissolve. Mostly I would want to use it to spike damage through against someone with a key piece of defensive equipment like Dragonscale Hauberk, Elemental Cloak, Veteran's Belt, or Suppression Cloak if I want to check for Nullify/Reverse Magic.

I don't think I would use it to shut down more active options such as disabling a weapon or wand. Shutting down a defensive measure for a turn can be capitalized on by multiple creatures/conjurations. Shutting down a weapon only reduces their attack strength slightly.

Another option with it that I didn't think of before is removing Corrode conditions from yourself by deactivating your chest piece for a round for 1 mana. That's a pretty efficient way to remove 2 Corrodes. For the Anvil Throne Warlord, it could even remove 3 Corrodes.
Agreed with all this. Except that I think Galvitar is a bit of an exception: if a Forcemaster paying lots of upkeep is on top of you with Galvitrar, disarming it could reduce a double 4-dice attack to a single 3-dice attack.

On wands probably only worth it if you suspect they're completely leaning on their Teleport Wand to save them from your deathpit this turn

Mages / Re: Paladin and Siren speculation
« on: June 15, 2014, 05:35:46 AM »
I want both the Paladin and Siren to be centered around creatures. I would like to see more soldiers with anti-dark themes and I think having a lot of sea creatures to choose from could be sweet. I'm gonna lock in my guess and say that Siren will be trained in water and psychic spells. That would make the most sense to me. Maybe she would have a built-in psychic spell as a special ability?
Given the name Siren you think she should: the strictest interpretation would be some sort of Taunt effect that forced creatures to approach her. But something that allowed her to daze creatures as a quick action by paying their Level or somesuch could work too.

General Discussion / Re: When new familars arrive?
« on: June 15, 2014, 02:55:20 AM »
A simple Arc Lightning or two should easily take care of it. That or just Falcon Precision a creature and smack her a few times.
She's still flying though! I think the easiest approaches are knockdown if you have a mage/creature with decent melee (get rid of flying and defence at once, hit her, dies) or flameblast (burn beats daze for a vulnerable caster)

General Discussion / Re: Flavor over Function?
« on: June 14, 2014, 03:03:07 AM »
One of the things I like about MageWars is that there are two stages at which you're being competitive: the build of the book and the play of the game.

This means that you can be flavourful with the book, but still 'play to win' in the game itself. I prefer games when both people are playing to win, as that's how the games are built to work, but it works fine for me if the books are built on a different basis, as they're a set quantity once the game starts.

As well as allowing flavour, this means if I'm playing an opponent I usually beat I can get a really close game without pulling punches at all by, for instance, playing an army-building warlord or a ranged-attack Johtari beastmaster

Mages / Re: Alternate Necromancer
« on: June 13, 2014, 12:49:47 AM »
On the distance-summoning, if you made it a one-off (like Pet etc.) I don't know if it would be OP. After all, if you're summoning something under your opponent's feet, you're also summoning something that they're well positioned to deal with and you're not well positioned to support. Maybe it's because I've only played against zombie builds that this doesn't sound so scary: I quite like the idea of my opponent putting zombies in my corner, I'd only leave them behind as I chased him down!

Spellbook Design and Construction / Re: Blood Wolves
« on: June 06, 2014, 06:37:25 AM »
I find walls of thorns quite pleasing against forcefields... also against Forcemasters in general, as they sometimes rely on defenses more than armour.

Mages / Re: Alternate Necromancer
« on: June 04, 2014, 01:22:30 PM »
Yeah I figure we're a LONG way off from getting alternates to the Druid or Necromancer as they're fairly recent additions but I was thinking a little on it and this is what I pondered.

As there's a nation in Etheria that is Egyptian themed(I read it mentioned when they previewed Pharoahs Cheetah and those Kickstarter cards) wouldn't it be cool if we got a third option for the Necromancer to focus on: Mummies! Also since Egyptians did a lot of scientific work with alchemy and death sciences there'd be a wealth of stuff for an Egyptian themed Necromancer to tap into. Maybe a late game Sutekh appearance or something.

Plenty of material in fantasy works for mummy use as well obviously.
Wouldn't be surprised. Nice for the idea of a more 'religious' necromancer. He could work well with laying traps (to catch tomb robbers... except isn't he a tomb robber?)

Warhammer did a similar thing to this: traditional necromancers were vampires/mages leading zombies and skeletons, but the 'Tomb Kings' are the ancient Kings of Egypt  Khemri returned to take vengeance on those who thought that they could take the land just because everyone was dead.

Mages / Re: Paladin and Siren speculation
« on: June 04, 2014, 01:20:24 PM »
In terms of sitting between Priest and Priestess (and because the 'lay on hands' stuff has already been done by Priestess), I'd guess that Paladin would give buffs to the rest of his gang.

Maybe he has Aegis 1 and gives it to every creature in his zone, say. Stacked with armour, that would make him a complete tank. Discourage him comboing with angels, too, which could be a design choice (he leads knights and clerics, Priests+Priestesses call on the Celestial Host).

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5