PDA

View Full Version : The Way Combat Works



Reziel
05-11-2013, 06:15 AM
Is anyone disappointed to see that it seems to use the same combat system as Magic? I kind of prefer the WoW TCG style.

Xenavire
05-11-2013, 06:17 AM
Magic is rather popular, and simpler for a newer player.
I personally love this style.

WWKnight
05-11-2013, 06:18 AM
I think I prefer Magic too, although im really not excited for the actual gameplay portion of Hex.

Kami
05-11-2013, 06:19 AM
I prefer Magic's style too. But then again, I'm an old-school player.

Besides, there's enough twists on their take of the format to keep it fresh, unique, and interesting.

ShaolinRaven
05-11-2013, 06:22 AM
I love the style for Hex. Its easy to learn for people new to the collectible card game rules and its a stable system as well for turn based gameplay. I also think there will be enough new card interactions since the game is digital that while the base skeleton of the rules are similar to Magic the actual strategies and card/deck manipulation options will be interesting.

Mushroom_C1oud
05-11-2013, 06:26 AM
I've played many TCGs over the years but to me MTG has had the most strategic depth. HEX adds onto that with going all digital.

WWKnight
05-11-2013, 06:30 AM
Mushroom, if you are interested in strategic depth, I strongly recommend you take a look at Infinity Wars :)

Mushroom_C1oud
05-11-2013, 06:39 AM
Mushroom, if you are interested in strategic depth, I strongly recommend you take a look at Infinity Wars :)

Took a look, it looks really good. Gotta say, the animating sprites on the cards look great. I'll check it out when it gets released but with TCGs it's gotta be an all-or-nothing deal cause I don't have enough money to spread the love.

WWKnight
05-11-2013, 06:41 AM
Infinity Wars is entirely F2P. You can get every card in the game without spending a cent if you chose to. :)

Mushroom_C1oud
05-11-2013, 06:47 AM
Infinity Wars is entirely F2P. You can get every card in the game without spending a cent if you chose to. :)

Well, you can't argue with free. I will definitely check it out :cool:

Storm_Fireblade
05-11-2013, 03:55 PM
Is anyone disappointed to see that it seems to use the same combat system as Magic? I kind of prefer the WoW TCG style.

Absolutely not. While I did prefer Yu-Gi-Oh for quite a while due to the lack of ressources (I hate being mana screwed so much), the little twist with colorless mana and permanent treshold was enough to at least take away some of my worries regarding the magic system. And when it comes to the combat I was always very fond of Magic and I'm thrilled to see it as the basis for HEX, while CZE still is going to improve the mechanics in so many ways, due to the digital possibilities :)

Showsni
05-11-2013, 04:05 PM
Happy to use Magic's combat, myself. But can damage be placed on the stack?

WWKnight
05-11-2013, 04:32 PM
Happy to use Magic's combat, myself. But can damage be placed on the stack?

Oh God! I hope so. Then I will shut up about how they copied magic because I will be happy that they copied GOOD magic.

Xenavire
05-11-2013, 04:40 PM
Wait, new magic doesn't put damage on the stack? No wonder Duels of the planeswalkers is full of freaking cheaters (from my point of veiw.) Also the mana burn thing, and storing mana in the pool by tapping something seem to be gone too. Where did the tactics and thinking go?

Devaux
05-11-2013, 04:45 PM
Oh God! I hope so. Then I will shut up about how they copied magic because I will be happy that they copied GOOD magic.

I disagree on so many levels but I've seen arguments about damage on/off the stack and they're always dum and never go anywhere.

Rieper
05-11-2013, 04:46 PM
Uh remeber when they announce the damage stack and not being able to do anything there. I got so sad, i really loved my learn search elf(forgot name), that could block a early drop and then search for land when damage was on stack.

Devaux
05-11-2013, 04:53 PM
Uh remeber when they announce the damage stack and not being able to do anything there. I got so sad, i really loved my learn search elf(forgot name), that could block a early drop and then search for land when damage was on stack.

You can still do things like that. You just can't kill the other creature AND sacrifice the blocker.

Xenavire
05-11-2013, 04:55 PM
Well to be fair Rieper, playing duels of the planeswalkers, you can block, then do sacrifice or other activated effects, and even if your monster is gone, the damage is blocked, but there were some nice tricks you could do in the past that are now gone. Some of the functionality it had before is still there, but most is gone, which is sad.

Devaux
05-11-2013, 04:59 PM
Well to be fair Rieper, playing duels of the planeswalkers, you can block, then do sacrifice or other activated effects, and even if your monster is gone, the damage is blocked, but there were some nice tricks you could do in the past that are now gone. Some of the functionality it had before is still there, but most is gone, which is sad.

It actually promotes healthier and more strategic gameplay. Not that anybody who played Magic before the change would let you believe that.

LargoLaGrande
05-11-2013, 05:06 PM
It took me about a year of hating the M10 changes before I warmed up to them. That was when Ember Hauler was printed and I realized just how much design space was opened up with the removal of damage on the stack.

Showsni
05-11-2013, 05:07 PM
Uh remeber when they announce the damage stack and not being able to do anything there. I got so sad, i really loved my learn search elf(forgot name), that could block a early drop and then search for land when damage was on stack.

Sakura Tribe Elder?

Basically, older sacrifice effects became a lot weaker. (STE, Mogg Fanatic, Ravenous Balog, etc.)

In a way, I'm more upset about Mana Burn being got rid of - losing damage on the stack makes a few cards weaker. Losing Mana Burn causes entire cards and even decks to stop functioning (my friend had a nifty Power Surge/Manabarbs/Mana Flare/CoP: Red deck... Okay, with Manabarbs it still kind of works, but Power Surge on its own is now useless.).

Xenavire
05-11-2013, 05:11 PM
I wont argue, I haven't played any REAL games of it, and I am not precisely clear on the differences. But would you care to elaborate? You have me intrigued.
What is this Ember Hauler, and how did damage on the stack changing effect it?

WWKnight
05-11-2013, 05:11 PM
It actually promotes healthier and more strategic gameplay. Not that anybody who played Magic before the change would let you believe that.

Thats because thats your opinion, and myself and others who played before the change have a different one. Its ok though, we can still be friends :)

WWKnight
05-11-2013, 05:12 PM
Xena, with damage ont eh stack, you could block a creature, wait for damage to happen, and before it resolved sacrifice the creature for its added benefit. So Mogg fanatic, for example, is a 1/1 who could bring down X/2's but dealing damage and then exploding himself for an extra 1 damage.

houjix
05-11-2013, 05:14 PM
The Hex combat system is ok, but persistent damage would have been preferable. I'd prefer WoW's system or at least something closer to that, but I guess we take what we can get. It's obvious they decided to go with an almost Magic system because the undertaking of creating an online TCG crossed with an MMO was daunting enough without trying to create a whole new game system on top of that.

Devaux
05-11-2013, 05:17 PM
Thats because thats your opinion, and myself and others who played before the change have a different one. Its ok though, we can still be friends :)

An opinion shared by the developers (both when the change was made and today) and backed by unprecedented growth of the game. Its more interesting to make a decision between dealing damage and getting the sacrifice effect than to just always get both.

Also, as pointed out it enables stronger, cooler, sacrifice effects.

For those not aware Ember Hauler was a 2/2 that you could sacrifice to deal 2 damage to a creature or player. With damage on the stack it would be trivially easy to have it "trade" with a creature in combat AND kill another creature meaning that for three mana across 2 installments you could get an easy 2-for-1 and it would have made combat a nightmare for your opponent. With damage not using the stack you can only have it deal combat damage to a creature OR sacrifice it to kill a creature.

EDIT: It also has the bonus of making more sense.

Xenavire
05-11-2013, 05:18 PM
I know how it used to work WWKnight, I played pre-change - I am more interested how it became more strategic. It sounds more like some strategies got nerfed, but if some got better, I am anxious to hear about them.

Fireblast
05-11-2013, 05:20 PM
Or chump and deal 2 to the face :)

~

Xenavire
05-11-2013, 05:21 PM
Devaux, that doesn't seem like a plus or a minus compared to before (depending on point of view.)

Technically it could swing in, unopposed, dealing it's 2 damage, then insta-nuke anything the opponent plays (especially anything that is weak with a scary effect). Before, you could just do that in combat as well.

It just sounds like they nerfed the sacrifice effects, and anything instant that would influence board presence (bounce cards).

Seems like an overall strategic loss, but a gain in security.

Rieper
05-11-2013, 05:24 PM
Sakura Tribe Elder?

Thank you! ever since i wrote that, the name has been bugging me, since i couldnīt remeber it. ><

Devaux
05-11-2013, 05:28 PM
Devaux, that doesn't seem like a plus or a minus compared to before (depending on point of view.)

Technically it could swing in, unopposed, dealing it's 2 damage, then insta-nuke anything the opponent plays (especially anything that is weak with a scary effect). Before, you could just do that in combat as well.

It just sounds like they nerfed the sacrifice effects, and anything instant that would influence board presence (bounce cards).

Seems like an overall strategic loss, but a gain in security.

Let me clarify.

Sacrifice effects got nerfed. They are weaker than before the rules change.

When I say its more strategic what I mean is it rewards the experienced player. It adds another decision point (do I trade in combat or use this ability). Another decision point means that its another point for a player to make and incorrect judgement and chose the wrong path. But it also means that its another point where the better player can gain an advantage over the other player.

With damage on the stack once you knew the trick you could do it all the time and it was almost always correct to wait until damage was on the stack to activate abilities. But now you have to plan better and understand your actions better in order to make the best decisions.

EDIT: Its actually a loss in security. It forces you to commit to a course of action rather than literally waiting past the last possible second to take action.

EDIT2: Here (https://www.wizards.com/Magic/magazine/Article.aspx?x=mtg/daily/mm/51) is an article where Magic's lead designer explains why damage was taken off the stack. You can ctrl+f "stack" to skip to the appropriate section if you'd like though the article is a good read.

Xenavire
05-11-2013, 05:38 PM
Well, the way I see it is the other player would also be more wary about it - and sacrificing something that isn't about to die is a tougher choice. In the past an aggro deck could just fill up on sacrifice effect beaters and go to town, but here they would take more careful use on both sides - that sounds like it is more secure to me.

As it is, I imagine most scenarios involve chump blocking huge or lethal damage, and sacrificing it anyway, making it a little bit moot - you can't kill anything, but you do avoid damage, which is still a plus.

So like I said, it could go both ways, which a person might think is better. I don't really think I have a preference, although damage on the stack really would help a control deck (blue + bounce spells, deal your damage and bounce your own monster to avoid lethal damage - you still have to pay to play it again.) It seems a loss to blue (or anything using bounce cards) but otherwise, it is not a massive change, in the long run, it is a slight modification of style.

Erebus
05-11-2013, 06:02 PM
Also a big thing to be concern with (which is obvious if you've played MTG:online) is all the places where priority conflicts arise.

MTG allows you to customize this, but if you turn them all on. It could really bog down a game, especially a multiplayer format.

LargoLaGrande
05-11-2013, 06:06 PM
Devaux, that doesn't seem like a plus or a minus compared to before (depending on point of view.)

Technically it could swing in, unopposed, dealing it's 2 damage, then insta-nuke anything the opponent plays (especially anything that is weak with a scary effect). Before, you could just do that in combat as well.

It just sounds like they nerfed the sacrifice effects, and anything instant that would influence board presence (bounce cards).

Seems like an overall strategic loss, but a gain in security.

Except, while they nerfed effects that abused damage going on the stack, it allows them to print stronger cards with those effects. Ember hauler was my example earlier, pre M10 it would have to cost 1RR and it would still be pretty aggressively costed. More recently we have Restoration Angel (3W, 3/4 - Flash, When it enters the battlefield, exile a non angel you control, then return it to the battlefield), who is an all-star in standard and is about 2 mana undercosted than if damage used the stack. To a lesser extent we have Falkenrath Aristocrat (2RB, 4/1 - flying, haste, sac a creature: Aristocrat becomes indestructable until end of turn) who is a staple in red black based aggro decks.

As for the strategic loss comment, there isn't any. When damage stacked there was always one objectively correct line of play, stack damage, get effect. Now you have to actually figure out whether damage on the opposing creature is worth more to you than the effect you could be getting. You end up with more possible lines of play, with stronger effects than when damage stacked.

edit:

So like I said, it could go both ways, which a person might think is better. I don't really think I have a preference, although damage on the stack really would help a control deck (blue + bounce spells, deal your damage and bounce your own monster to avoid lethal damage - you still have to pay to play it again.) It seems a loss to blue (or anything using bounce cards) but otherwise, it is not a massive change, in the long run, it is a slight modification of style.

But now control decks are able to get stronger control effects (like Resto Angel). That's what I meant with my original comment of opening up design space.

Xenavire
05-11-2013, 06:38 PM
I stick by what I have said - in certian situations, nothing will have changed, and some utility has been lost, while on the other hand it allows for single cards to become more powerful - it goes both ways. Either could be seen better, and it largely comes down to specific situations.

I mean, in the past, it was common to chump block some big nasty, and sacrifice to get your effect - that hasn't changed. But some other interactions have changed, and some are better, some are worse.

The new method reminds me of Yugioh and the damage step - only cards changing att/def can be played, and counters, but nothing else. It is a similar mechanic, now damage happens before someone can use a trick to remove said monster (or they have to use it before damage, cancelling the damage - same as yugioh.)

Like I said, plusses and minuses for both. And I don't mind either.