September 19, 2021, 12:18:32 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 - Super Sorcerer

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 11
My temple paladin bring the temple on turn1 and gear up for melee. On turn 3 I bring a level 3 buddy (usually a Temple High Guard). since my melee build bring most of the heavy equipment on turns 4-7, usually I just cast clerics on turns 5 and 7. Then I bring a 2nd or 3rd level creature for reinforcement every other round (sometimes I wait an extra round or two to bring a bigger creature).
It is sort of a melee+reinforcements build :)

About wind, in my local meta, Wall of thorns+jet stream is more common than Wall of thorns+force push.
Even though force attack (which weren't mentioned yet) deal more damage, I've also seen lightning attacks out of school as a counter to incorporeal.

Spells / Re: Tataree... reasons to play?
« on: April 28, 2017, 08:27:05 AM »
But a gator toughness or even better, a glancing blow would. How many sp are you willing to spend to drop a 6 mana qcd lvl1 creature? One force push and im ahead in sp agaist anything but a FM
If you cast gator toughness on it, it becomes a 10 mana and 2 quick actions that costs 2 spellbook points. Against a warlock, it might be a flameblast rather than a force push, and then gator toughness might not be enough.

Tataree's mana generation is nice, and his defense might be useful in removing guard (would remove on average 6 guards before his defense will fail and the counterattack will kill him). Useful to counter these gargoyles, guardian angels and panzerguards.

General Discussion / Re: Time Gentlemen, Please!
« on: April 23, 2017, 03:34:00 PM »
Now that the game was published on Keejchen's youtube channel, after watching it I must say that I didn't see any point in the game when Keejchen was supposed to be more offensive.

Mages / Re: This might be interesting. A poll dudes and dudettes
« on: April 16, 2017, 02:31:51 AM »
I don't have a best mage, I usually win with all mages.
I like most the holy mages and the forcemaster, with the straywood not far away from them.
I dislike the necromancer, even though I won all 5 games I played one, and won against it 4 out of 5 games. Even though I know how to counter him, using him still feel like cheating. I hate zombie necromancers more than I hate skeleton necromancers.

Spellbook Design and Construction / Re: Spellbook Challenge!
« on: April 08, 2017, 02:13:21 PM »
My favored themed spellbook is my sith lord. A forcemaster with galvitar, force crushes and lots of lightning attack spells. I only played it once (against a water wizard when they were still legal), and won the game, but it is a really nice book.
Other themed spellbooks I have used, and won at least one game with, include a dwarf warlord that only have dwarves and an orc warlord with orcs and goblins.

Rules Discussion / Re: Defense from Hydrothermal Vent's attack
« on: April 04, 2017, 11:47:00 PM »
In the Attack Procedure chart in the official supplement on page 3, the backgroundcolor of the cell "avoid attack - other attacks" (which includes the attack of hydrothermal vent) is yellow. According to the statement above this means that the defense step is part of the procedure for the attack type "other attacks".
Therefore the attack of Hydrothermal Vent and trample attacks can be avoided with every defense!
Now about trample, I think t does count as melee attack, but simply isn't affected by melee +x trait. So if a defende can't defend from melee attacks then it can't defend from trample.

General Discussion / Re: Time Gentlemen, Please!
« on: March 30, 2017, 12:29:02 AM »
Well, long time is an issue different from many rounds.
This is why I hate OCTGN. The games take forever, and people purposefully stall games out.

There is nothing on the line in those game. There is no prize, no reward other than an 'Atta Boy'.
Yes, planning phases that take 5 minutes are really long. On a real board a game that end on round 9-10 usually takes only about half an hour, and that's a good reason not to play on octagon. I usually play quickly, and planning phase for me rarely takes more than a minute, and I wait for my opponent most of the time anyway. So I totally understand your problem with octagon games just being way too slow, and that is also one of the reasons I don't play on octagon.
I believe the post here is about games that just take too many round, and a strategic delay in the number of rounds is definitely fine. In a tournament no one should play a sub-optimal move intentionally.
And I don't think people purposefully stall games out, it just takes them more time.

Strategy and Tactics / Re: Paladin vs Priest: For Temple that is
« on: March 28, 2017, 03:12:07 PM »
Well,  I like to play both of them with a temple as well.
I will compare them by categories:

1) Melee -
The priest is about burning enemy creatures, while dazing and stunning them so they wouldn't damage the priest while the burns do their work. I've seen priests using that bow, but I've never seen a priest with that bow winning a game, as the lack of daze and stun chance just ruin that strategy. So priests should use the Staff of Asyra, which is an amazing weapon.
The paladin melee just go for tons of damage with his challenge ability. unlike the priest that go for a medium amount of damage but great conditions, the paladin deal a great amount of damage with medium conditions. That's a totally different strategy.

2) Training -
The priest have access to the crown of protection, that allow you a really nice 2 mana spell for the round you would like to save mana for a big creature in a later round (or round when you lack mana because you just summoned something big). Giving an armor +1 token is like giving a creature a leather piece, except it doesn't use spells from spellbook and doesn't take slots (and can't be dissolved). It also combine really well with angels.
The paladin have access to balista, a very good conjuration, especially when combined with a temple of light. The paladin also have in school spells like akiro's favor, and having at least 4 copies of this spell allows you to give a reroll to many of your creatures.  An akiro's favor goes well with every creature that roll at least 5 dice (including knights of westlock, crusader griffons, Alandell, Ehren and some others). It's also really cheap to use on creatures other than your mage (only 3 mana). The champion's gauntlets are also a wonderful spell the paladin got access to.

3) Creature buffs-
The priest got the holy avenger ability, and it a very nice ability. The +5 life bonus combines well with the armor+1 tokens you can grant from the crown of protection. It also let you buff a creature greatly even when it didn't cost much to include him in your book. For example, let's start with a white cloack knight, a 2nd level spell. Now lets make him a holy avenger and give him an Armor+1 token, and we get a creature with 13 life, 2 armor, an attack of 4 dice that can be increased to 6 piercing +1 against enemies that attacked this round, and he is even immune to attack spells (for just 14 mana and 2 spellbook points).
The paladin have some awesome auras that benefit the creatures in his zone. The problem is that you need good positioning to keep them in the same zone as your paladin, but things like melee+1 piercing+2 to every creature in your zone is pretty awesome.

4) General abilities-
The priest have its creature do defend itself, while the paladin is there to defend his own creatures.
The priest have a holy avenger that get a bonus against an enemy that attack the mage, and the priest also daze his enemies so they couldn't attack him back. The paladin have an aura that allow him to take damage instead of his creatures, and if his challenged enemy attack a target that isn't the paladin then the paladin gain valor from it while the paladin allow his challenged enemy to get the same rerolls he get while attacking the paladin and not his creatures.

Overall. these are two very different melee holy mages, and I really like both of them :)

General Discussion / Re: Time Gentlemen, Please!
« on: March 28, 2017, 11:09:29 AM »

When going on increase your chance of winning the game, then you should definitely go on. Perhaps on a friendly game I will go for the kill even when I shouldn't if I am tired and want to finish the game (though I might play as I should if I have the patience at the time), but on tournament games no serious player will ever make a sub-optimal play intentionally.

When you're relying on dice to win, there is always a chance to roll a dud. Does that mean that you must continue playing forever because you'll *never* be 100% sure that you'll win? No. At some point you need to decide that your chances of victory are certain enough and go for the Mage kill. The level of certainty you have in the laws of physics is way more certainty than you need to justifiably believe that you will win a game of Mage Wars Arena. And if you play long enough to even become that certain of your victory then that means your opponent is deluding themselves that *maybe* they'll get lucky on the dice and scrape out a win. Perhaps continuing to play like that when your victory is almost completely certain makes your opponent think that your position isn't as good as it looks like it is, making them think they have a better chance of turning things around than they actually do.
Going on and on forever will only let your opponent a chance to have enough lucky rolls to swing the arena and make a comeback. Focusing on targets other than the enemy mage could only happen when there are such targets, and they eventually run out. More than once I won a game when my opponent didn't focus my mage on time.

I didn't watch the game, and I would probably watch it once it is published, but there is a whole lot difference between saying "you should just kill his mage because this game goes too long", which make absolutely no sense in a tournament game, and saying "I think it would have been a better strategy to kill the enemy mage earlier so there will not be a chance of him making a comeback". Sometimes it is a mistake not to go for the enemy mage, but sometimes it is the right play.
After Sharkbait VS Powlich, we saw what happens when you just go for the enemy mage even though you could get a major board advantage. And I mean the move where he played poison blood+fireball on the paladin instead of taking out Galvitar and finish of the two very wounded Noble vanguards that just stayed there and kept rolling 3 dice every round each while guarding with intercept.
Sometimes the best move is taking the board advantage, and sometimes the best move is going for the mage.

Spells / Re: General's Signet Ring
« on: March 21, 2017, 05:42:45 PM »
So far, this opening with 3a was a fast enough response to early aggression. Once it will fail me, I might change it.
In my local meta, turn 2 aggression usually don't deal enough damage to seriously threaten on the 2nd turn, but is a beginning for a more serious aggression on the following rounds. Against such aggression usually the panzergarde+defend on turn 3 is enough, and the goblin grunt is a 3 dice attack until my opponent take an action to get rid of him (which is an action not spent on attacking my mage).

Spells / Re: General's Signet Ring
« on: March 21, 2017, 11:44:26 AM »
My opening  with bloodwave warlords usually goes like:
1) barracks + construction yard.
2) goblin grunt (from barracks) + general signet ring + garrison post.
with several options for the 3 turn:
3a) dwarf panzergarde + defend/leather piece (depend on when I need it guarding)  + guarding with mage in garrison post zone (or giving a command if one of them is helpfull).
3b) orc butcher + mana flower + guarding/command.
3c) orc butcher + meditation amulet + meditate.
3d) bridge troll + running to the corner.

Strategy and Tactics / Re: Can Certain Mages Not win vs Others?!
« on: March 21, 2017, 11:27:57 AM »
I didn't play this match yet, but if the main problem is weak condition markers, then should the Cleansing aura help a lot to counter it?
It allows as a quick healing spell for 1 valor to heal a creature 2 damage and remove a poison condition by paying it's removal cost.
I usually carry one purify as well (because getting rid of poison blood and ghoul rot as a quick action if nice, and I rather spend my full action on a melee attack rather than remove curse).
Beside, against mages than use their full action on attacking rather than casting spells, gate to voltary is a little less effective (for getting only 1 mana per round from opponent casting). At least that was the way it felt against other melee mages, I didn't try it against the paladin yet.

Strategy and Tactics / Re: To give or to keep first initiative
« on: March 19, 2017, 11:16:20 AM »
It depend on my opening.
Let's say I play a beastmaster, if I intend to start with Lair+harmonize and bring a creature on 2nd round that will act in the 3rd round, and I will want it to act first, then I will want initiative in the 3rd round so I will take it in the 1st round. If I am going with double mana flower on the first round and a mana flower and a lair on the second round, and I bring a creature only on the 3rd round that will act only on the 4th round, then I will give my opponent the initiative so I will have it on 4th round.
If I play a paladin that goes Ehren+Regrowth on the first round, then Dorseus+Leather piece on the second round and I want to bring a hand of bim-shalla on the third round to heal Ehren completely, then I will take the initiative on 1st round so I will have it on 3rd round so Ehren will be fully healed before my opponent act.
If your opening include a ballista, you will probably want to cast the ballista on a round you don't have initiative, so you will shoot on your initiative, so you would decide initiative the way it could work out.

Generally, there is a round that you think you would probably want the initiative in, so you plan accordingly.

World and Lore / Re: Questions about wizards/Arcane school
« on: March 18, 2017, 01:51:48 PM »
I think the mind school is more about psychology than logic.

About the leadership of sortilege, probably the leader actually spend most of his time on arcane studies and have ministers that know what their doing. Sort of like the supreme commander of USA army is the president, who usually have no knowledge or experience in battlefield strategy, but the ones that actually run the army are the generals.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 11