Post by toyotami on Dec 1, 2008 4:27:06 GMT -5
I've been playing decently for a few months now but one thing that i notice is that my openings are weak.
Generally, how i percieve myself to win games is by taking a proportion of damage in exchange for board position (usually in the form of spell flow), which i then control for, if not the entire game, then enough to put me by the end game.
Another technique i have, which alot of players that play me can attest to, is to let my opponents have monsters, particularly ogres in exchange for health, or again, board position in the for of spell flow.
If my opponent has an ogre and i have LH: PSD up and he has a counter or disruption, lets say DPP
Toyo: LH:xPSD
RH:>>>>
Opponent LH: PSFW
RH: xDPP
I have 3 choices. Charm him, charm his monster or fake out.
This situation clearly favors my opponent. If he Amnesias his ogre (which is often the sensible "safe" thing to do, he hardly loses even if charmed because control of the ogre gives him enough momentum to recover.) If I try to take the ogre i am down in health, spellflow and consequently, board position.
In the next flow i have the choice to allow my opponent to get an ogre i could have counterspelled:
Toyo LH:xPSD
RH:WWPS
Opponent LH: PSFW
RH: xxDP
or a similar thing if my oppoent has a counterspell,
Toyo LH:xPSD
RH:xxPS
Opponent LH: PSFW
RH: XXWP
The 50% chance of landing the first charm becomes a 50/50 gaurauntee of getting the ogre, whether i though F or D, so long as the target hits.
In a sense, the ogre has become ownerless and is the property of a coin flip. The ogre is actually LESS helpful to your opponent because of your superior spell flow. Ie. he has summoned himself into a ... storm
NOTE: If your opponent has an F line then taking the ogre becomes a more difficult task. Missile it when you can and bring up these 50/50's. In these cases, if your opponent is brave enough to counter the charm person you lose a HP and momentum.
These are some poorly illustrated examples but basically, at the moment i am trying to work towards finding traps i can lead an opponent into...that is, give them an apparent short term advantage that will lead to long term failure. This could be in the form of a lightning bolt, a monster or something else.
Of most interest to me is how to quantify the advantage of board position (spell-flow +/- monsters/poison etc.) versus damage, and how this comes to affect the generation of BIG MOVES.
In my second final against Bio, i hit him with a fireball and gave him an ogre with almost even board position (that is, i had a couple of charms coming up, i think). I was confident i could kill the ogre before it damaged me for 5. Bio took a risk and countered the charm to himself. Naturally if i had taken the ogre i would have been in an almost insurmountable lead. However that was not to be. He proceeded to use his elevated board position to grind me to paste.
The round where he succeded in defending himself from the charm became the BIG MOVE. Most games have them, one choice this way or that that shifts board position so much that the rest of the game is just going through motions, (though many players are capable of creating a second or third BIG MOVE in a game, especially if the leader makes a mistake)
A key to winning in warlocks is to make sure you dictate this big move...that you are the one to throw the lower probability risk at a time when you are more sure your opponent will play it safe. Often this involves a deep understanding of the psychology of your opponent. Being able to predict when your oppoent considers it time to go a BIG MOVE will make winners.
Creating a string of potential big moves (the simplest example can be a ParaFOD) when one has board position should be a goal for game theory.
That's it...i've prattled on long enough....i'm wondering, in this thread, whether people think there is anything meta about this game that hasn't been touched, that can have an affect. Clearly Bio is kicking alot of arse lately, care to share?
Generally, how i percieve myself to win games is by taking a proportion of damage in exchange for board position (usually in the form of spell flow), which i then control for, if not the entire game, then enough to put me by the end game.
Another technique i have, which alot of players that play me can attest to, is to let my opponents have monsters, particularly ogres in exchange for health, or again, board position in the for of spell flow.
If my opponent has an ogre and i have LH: PSD up and he has a counter or disruption, lets say DPP
Toyo: LH:xPSD
RH:>>>>
Opponent LH: PSFW
RH: xDPP
I have 3 choices. Charm him, charm his monster or fake out.
This situation clearly favors my opponent. If he Amnesias his ogre (which is often the sensible "safe" thing to do, he hardly loses even if charmed because control of the ogre gives him enough momentum to recover.) If I try to take the ogre i am down in health, spellflow and consequently, board position.
In the next flow i have the choice to allow my opponent to get an ogre i could have counterspelled:
Toyo LH:xPSD
RH:WWPS
Opponent LH: PSFW
RH: xxDP
or a similar thing if my oppoent has a counterspell,
Toyo LH:xPSD
RH:xxPS
Opponent LH: PSFW
RH: XXWP
The 50% chance of landing the first charm becomes a 50/50 gaurauntee of getting the ogre, whether i though F or D, so long as the target hits.
In a sense, the ogre has become ownerless and is the property of a coin flip. The ogre is actually LESS helpful to your opponent because of your superior spell flow. Ie. he has summoned himself into a ... storm
NOTE: If your opponent has an F line then taking the ogre becomes a more difficult task. Missile it when you can and bring up these 50/50's. In these cases, if your opponent is brave enough to counter the charm person you lose a HP and momentum.
These are some poorly illustrated examples but basically, at the moment i am trying to work towards finding traps i can lead an opponent into...that is, give them an apparent short term advantage that will lead to long term failure. This could be in the form of a lightning bolt, a monster or something else.
Of most interest to me is how to quantify the advantage of board position (spell-flow +/- monsters/poison etc.) versus damage, and how this comes to affect the generation of BIG MOVES.
In my second final against Bio, i hit him with a fireball and gave him an ogre with almost even board position (that is, i had a couple of charms coming up, i think). I was confident i could kill the ogre before it damaged me for 5. Bio took a risk and countered the charm to himself. Naturally if i had taken the ogre i would have been in an almost insurmountable lead. However that was not to be. He proceeded to use his elevated board position to grind me to paste.
The round where he succeded in defending himself from the charm became the BIG MOVE. Most games have them, one choice this way or that that shifts board position so much that the rest of the game is just going through motions, (though many players are capable of creating a second or third BIG MOVE in a game, especially if the leader makes a mistake)
A key to winning in warlocks is to make sure you dictate this big move...that you are the one to throw the lower probability risk at a time when you are more sure your opponent will play it safe. Often this involves a deep understanding of the psychology of your opponent. Being able to predict when your oppoent considers it time to go a BIG MOVE will make winners.
Creating a string of potential big moves (the simplest example can be a ParaFOD) when one has board position should be a goal for game theory.
That's it...i've prattled on long enough....i'm wondering, in this thread, whether people think there is anything meta about this game that hasn't been touched, that can have an affect. Clearly Bio is kicking alot of arse lately, care to share?
