I want to get a few people into this game that play Magic. Rather than try and shove a deck in front of them, I was wondering what a pure racial deck fo reach race can compare to (play style) in magic.

In other words, what race if any plays like a blue magic deck? ETC

I also played the WoW TCG so if the decks compare more closely to that game, what race plays like a Warlock deck for instance?

I plan on spending enough money to get the basic feel of each race. So, one of each of the games products I guess.

Are there any staples in the game, yet? If so, for example, which cards are MUST or nearly MUST haves in an order deck, dwarf deck, etc? Finally, what is current meta like? I remember seeing multiple ORCS ARE BEST. Now that the two elves are in, does that still hold true?

Off topic (sort of) will skaven cards end after this cycle. I noticed Doomwheel, Squeek Headtaker, Censer Bearers, and Screaming Bell, alon gwith others haven't made it into the game, so I figured I would ask. From what I noticed in the card catalog, none of the mid tier demons are in the game yet, so it is my guess we see bloodletters, plaguebearers, flamers, and demonettes in the next cycle about chaos.

Thanks for any answers you can provide.

The way I consider it is to take the cross section of Magic colours.

White

Green Blue

Red Black

and rotate the structure just 1/2 to anticlockwise to get a better translation and understanding to magic players of how they play. It doesn't work perfectly, But it's near enough to easily translate to Magic players who may be interested in giving WH:I a go.

White (Empire)

Dwarfs High Elves

Green Blue

Orcs Dark Elves

Red Black
Chaos

Empire- Is around about a white deck with Wrath of God (Judgement), lots of high quality weenies, lots of good solid protection cards like city gates (Think Moat), strong enchantments (<cough> support cards).

Dwarfs- Mix the strong Enchantments (<cough> support cards) with greens classic ability to have some really chunky heavy hitter creatures (<cough> Units). Dwarfs are life generating centered (Stream of life etc) with strong synergies when you stick down lots of developments. Funny enough, just as White/Green was a pretty sub-optimal deck last time I played, so Dwarfs currently are still sub-optimal, see, lots of similarities.

Orcs- Think Goblin Speed Decks, Crashing into you with Goblin suicide bombs, Think speedy green/red weenie decks which sprayed in land destruction to mess your resources a bit while they rushed you. Want damage? Rip there 'eads off + Bloodthirster is about as close to a Lightning Bolt as you'll get!

Chaos- Black Control with some amazing creatures. Royal assassins, snipers, discard with some direct damage red in there too.

Dark Elves- a Black/Blue mix of excellent enchantments, discard, control. Think Merman decks (if you have that long a memory to remember when they actually were played)

High Elves- White/Blue defensive counter.

I should note, before anyone jumps at me: I'm not saying that WH:I is these things, I'm just saying, if I was wanting to explain the game and the races to a group of Magic Players who'd never played before, this is how I'd relate it to them in terms they'd easily understand.

Buy one core set or mybe share one for trying out. Then just play a few test matches with the default race decks and you will find out very quickly wether you like it or not. You can imagine that with included battlepacks and the Assault on Ulthuan expansion the fun will develop several steps farther.

That is the only advise I can give although never played magic myself.

I agree with grille, just buy one base set and play with that a few times. It is meant to be played right out of the box.

I think your best bet would be to realize and explain that this game is NOT M:TG, really, at all. There may be some superficial similarities but that's about it. Pushing the game as just another version of your friends' chosen primary CCG isn't going to really lead to getting W:I played regularly as they'll always see W:I as just a minor version of their favorite game. I wouldn't go that route at all for that reason.

Let them discover the many differences in mechanics and theme, that make this every bit as fun as any other card game out there - and more fun in most cases. Good luck!

This game reminds me SO much of Magic. I think that's why I've gotten so into it so quickly. I used to love going to big tournaments on weekends, and you can really see that this game is heading that way. The lead developer is a former competitive card player, and soon there will be several competitive/sanctioned events and I may finally be able to satisfy that itch.

I think it's a great idea to introduce this game to other Magic players, or former Magic players (as in my case). They would pick up the game, timing nuances, and deck building very quickly. And if we could get some more successful, competitive M:TG players to participate in these forums, I know that would make this place a bit less frustrating (for me at least). We are seriously lacking the competitive crowd here.

The monetary investment may be high at first, as you really need to buy three of everything that has come out, but once you're caught up, you're looking at $15 a month to maintain your full playset, with the seldom $60 month (for 3x an expansion).

Oh, and to answer you original question.... :-p

You could say a pure Chaos deck would be like a Tier 3, Block Burn deck that's forced to play creatures because of a lack of burn spells. And the deck also lacks a finisher because most of the available cards can't target your opponent (his capital), only his creatures (units).

Orcs definitely remind me of an old school White Weenie deck running Wrath and Disenchant.

There is an Order deck (all three factions) that totally reminds me of playing with Bargain. A combo deck without an infinite combo, and you have to just "feel" when you're ready to "go off." (go too early and risk stalling out).

Dark Elves do relate to Black: they have the best non-damage-dealing targeted removal, the best discarding options, and the best "search" spell (tutor).

Pure Dwarfs they way I think their best run (today) feels a bit like Sligh, with Pillages and Stone Rains, and Goblin Bombardment.

High Elves have Boomerang and Counterspell

And Empire is weird. They dump a ton of resources (lands) into play quickly, so in that way they could relate to Green. But they're not using it to play giant indestructible fatties. They have a lot of resource intensive combat tricks though.

I played a few games just a while ago. Still at the store and purchased 3 of everything. I didn't say I was going to introduce this to Magic players as a minor magic game. It is not. All I needed to know was what decks a player would feel comfortable with starting based on the deck they play in Magic.

Thanks for that answer Bountyhunter and F7eleven.

I understand some people hate when a new game releases and others compare it to Magic for example, but I don't plan on doing that. I think first impressions are crucial to a person liking or disliking something. I am sure everyone here has had a bad first experience for a product, but then they gave it a second chance due to pressure, force, or boredom, chosen a different path and LOVED it.

I don't want the players to feel like it needs a second impression. Magic players are stubborn like that, heh.

With that question answered and now that I have 3 of each product, what are the staple cards for each race, alliance, or skaven? I have a ton of cards to read now, but I don't really know how to look for combos and such since this game is constantly changing based on kingdom, quest, and battlefield zones.

Thanks again for helping guys. Sorry for the confusion.

f7eleven said:

I think we'll have to agree to disagree about the similarities between W:I and M:TG, for one, and also about the comment that somehow, "These forums need some 'successful competitive M:TG players in here."

Could you be a bit more insulting without knowing a single thing about any of the players here? I'll put my NON-Magic CCG abilities and experiences up against any snot-nosed M:TG uber-leet competitive punk any day and feel **** good about my chances and my thorough understanding of the tenets behind this kind of game. Frankly, I'm extremely happy that we don't have too many of that type of game player around these forums - it'll start sucking pretty quick once that juvenile crowd shows up.

No thanks.

Wow, everytime MTG comes up in comparison with any other CCG people start to either talk it down or to overrate it as "the one and only competetive CCG" out there.

WH:I is completely different, I appreciate it if Magic players join our ranks, but convincing them with "It's just like Magic here, see?" doesn't seem to be the right way to do it to me. Magic players just need to stop to compare WH:I to Magic once and for all.

Seriously, it's a CCG and you can build decks here, but it has as many or as few similarities to MTG as any other CCG you can come up with. So to convince your friends you have to dissuade them from believing every other game with cards in it should be compared to magic first.

Don't missunderstand me Magic is a good CCG (being released in 1993 and still being on top is remarkable. I play it from time to times with some friends and yes I like it, it's fun), just not as "uber" as some people think it is. There are many tournaments, however balancing is not outstanding, some meta decks tend to rule competitions.

No offense to anybody, and I myself am not better with this post, but let's stop this MTG vs WH:I discussion please, it will just ruin the atmosphere in this forum.

Probably my longest english post ever =D

OFF TOPIC


You guys need to stop all together. Yes, I hate Magic also, but please don't highjack my thread, to trash Magic.

First Impression: It is obvious that just like warhammer the table top and magic the gathering, we have those "snots" running the show here too. Don't we have enough separation in this world? Anti-american/pro american. christian/aithiest. liberal/conservative. black/white. Seriously guys I did not create a topic to create a flame war.

Here is what I should have said I guess.

"For example, if I like a deck that is all about discarding cards from the opponents hand, destroying their resources, and controlling their playstyle, then what deck would I like?"

Thanks Bountyhunter and F7eleven for answering me and not needing a translation. And Freihandig, please get out of my topic. You didn't answer my question and just used it to spread hate more. You remind me of one of those xbox or ps3 fanboys that can only see black or white and never the gray middle ground. The gray ground being, both groups share the same interest in card games.

Just as F7eleven is wrong to say WI has no competitive types, you are just as wrong to assume all competitive magic players are snots. We call this "the pot calling kettle black". At least F7eleven helped me...

Ironic I mention first impressions earlier because I never got into the tourney magic games nor supported it locally because the guy I asked a question to was one of those "snots" and blew me off. So I said "**** you", told store owner he lost business and why I would never buy the cards.

Change your attitude sir, or you will hurt this game more than you know, by insulting potential future investments to this game.

BACK ON TOPIC

If I want to compete at tourney level, first I need to get a local gaming group going. My friends won't keep the tourneys alive alone. I am forced to recruit Magic players. For a while, since I own 3 of every product, they will leech off my supply and kind of proxy what interest them. But they will eventually want to buy their own, or convert over. I would like to know which cards would sell for high prices if this game was done in traditional booster pack TCG style.

This stuff matters to them. They are coming from a high meta style card game after all. BTW that "snot" I mentioned has placed 9th in worlds for magic.
I understand that you don't want these types in the game's atmosphere, I am with you. BUT sadly you need that crowd to encourage people to up their game, by feeling the rivalry and proving them wrong.

This game won't last if all it just is remain casual play only. I encourage everyone reading this to take that bold step and play Warhammer Invasion at your local stores Magic Night (usually Friday). Those knocked out early in the round maybe try to get them to try it out, BUT BE NICE, maybe seem nervous. Magic players like to feel like the rule all other gamers. Most will respect you for that. After all look at them they spend a TON of money to get where they are, they strategise and plan decks, testing them thoroughly nights before major tourneys.

And if they just lost chances are they will be mad. I had a chance to talk to that snob one day, he told me the above, told me it is like bothering a student studying when you walk up to a multi-pro tour champ to ask "newbish" questions. I agree now and have other reason for hating Magic.

We really do need to push this game. The more people playing the more input Eric and crew can gather to determine future cards and products.

Again thanks to all who take that step to not profile and who is allowed to play a game, whos future is determine by the numbers in the community.

Unfortunately you've sort of missed both of our points here, I fear. No one is saying that it won't help W:I to try and entice gamers to try this cool game out. But I strongly suspect that by making the comparison, you're going to never meet up to their original game's level of excitement for them. This happens a lot in the gaming world and in other forms of entertainment as well (especially videogaming).

The best tool you can use is to treat the game like its own entity and sell it as such, imho.

Your thread is, of course, your thread and you have my apologies for any hijacking that may have occurred, however, I think our posts are also reasonable and for the most part tangentially related to your original topic - in that regard, it's not much of a hijacking here.

F7 basically insulted the entire pre-existing W:I community with his remarks and deserved to be called out for it, again, imho. That wasn't cool. Maybe he didn't mean it that way, maybe he did...either way we need to police ourselves and keep things civil and polite. It's not the best policy to waltz into a forum that you're new to (as he is) and start trying to rip on the pre-existing online community. That rarely goes well, just for the record.

We all want this game to do well and succeed. By all accounts it already is anyway. Could it use some more marketing help and such? Sure, every bit extra is good. But before people blindly go out in some vain attempt to woo Magic: The Gathering players as if someone they're some magically "higher-caliber" of gamer than anyone else here, think a bit about what you're actually saying to the community here.

'Nuff said.

f7eleven said:

LOL.

Only one thing to say i think there are ex competitive player of CCG in the community.
How can you say that there are not Competitive player around?

So i will introduce myself:

I personnaly didn t play high rank game in MTG but in L5R, i was in the top 8 of 80% of Kotei(championship) where i could get.
I was second in the test of ruby championship in the open format.
I was granted best crane, shadowland and crab player in many tournament( 200 player tournament).

Do u want to play only with PGM?
Good
If you dont want to be frustrate by the low level talk then don't read this forum

I hate people thinking there better that every one else.

I hope one day, i can play against you in a tournament......

I never meant to imply I was better than anyone else, or that competitive players are better than casual players. But they ARE different.

I'm just frustrated trying to find innovative or competitive deck lists/discussions in this community. There's some, but it's being overshadowed by the more casual stuff. What the forum needs is sub-sections of Deck Building for "Competitive" and "Casual." Then I won't have to open threads with 60 card decklists that aren't running Contested Village, and only have 1x their best card because the person only owns 1x of that Battle Pack.

That's an extreme example, but even the 53 card decks built from 2x each core/BP can't really be taken as "competitive."

f7eleven said:

we are eagerly waiting for your competitive and maybe innovative decks !

f7eleven said:

My apologies, then, F7eleven, I thought you were being disparaging. I can see your point. It IS tough to get a good feel for some good deck discussion amongst players only using a single set. I think if you read more carefully though, in the Deck-Building section of these forums, I think you WILL find some very good decks posted and/or being discussed. Ya just have to look hard enough, that's all.

I agree with f7eleven on a casual/competitive split, but before that is going to happen there have to be more players in here =)

Didn't mean to bash Magic, I personally couldn't say if I like it more as WH:I, but they are equal for me, just different. Also didn't want to post offtopic stuff.

Can't see where I said all competitive Magic Players are snots or that we as card gamers don't share the same interest, didn't mean to insult anybody, perhaps it's because I'm not a native speaker and my phrasing isn't obvious enough to prevent such missunderstandings.

Sorry, if I caused some confusion on what I wanted to say with my post, should have made it clearer. Wytefang pretty much summed it up.

Apologies to you Curator, it's your thread I won't bother anyone in here anymore, just felt like we missed each other here and that could cause ill-feeling ;o). I'm out.

Mister Mask said:

I've just started a thread in the Deck Building forum called "A Unitless Deck!"

This is why I hate debates on forums or over email. Many times people get misheard when they are not confronted face to face. I am not saying to try and go on a crusade to convert Magic players and I agree Magic and WI should be treated as separate games. All I was asking and I think I have learned my lesson about bringing the "magic" word into these forums, is what the different type of races play like. Since Magic IS and will always be number one seller, I used it for comparing deck styles to.

Okay! now that we all kissed and made up, can you guys attempt to answer the final question? Are there any staples in this game? Any must have cards ina certain types of decks?

I saw Innovation was on a ton of deck list in 3 copies each deck. I assume that would be a staple then?

Usually I will just play and learn which cards are good based on the current curve in the game. But in this game we don't have a curve. The number of resources and cards you draw change and are affected by not just you every turn but also the opponent. This makes it hard to just jump right in to the game.

So those that have been playing since launch, can you just give me your take on strategy? I will again list more example questions:

Each race has a Hero for each zone (battlefield, quest, kingdom). Is it mandatory most of the time to have one or more copies of each of these heroes? Are heroes really that good in this game?

Not being able to move units (exception Empire) how does this affect which zone you play cards?

When you run out of cards you lose the game. You can determine the cards you draw with the number of power in the zone, but only the opponent can decide if that number of cards that you are forced to draw is lowered by kill units and removing power from the zone. How many cards should a player be drawing per turn on average? To the same effect how many resources is too much or wasted amount?

Developements stall defeat and can turn the game around. Should you always be placing developments, or just place them to counter the damages on a zone?

Now just take those questions and apply them to each race. For example, I am sure dwarves that rely on developments for their strategy put more developments into play more than the other races.

Lastly to go back to my original purpose of the thread. How does each race play? F7eleven and Bountyhunter were on the right track for answers I was looking for, so can the rest give their input.

Just to get something started on the right track, hoping for more detailed though from experienced players.

Orcs = rush? Red weenie decks? fast and very aggressive?

Dwarves = control? pure white? stronger with numbers and enhancements?

High elves = control? green regen and blue counters? slow very calculating?

Curator said:

That's funny, because I likened Orcs to WHITE weenie, and Dwarves to a RED Sligh/Aggro-Control deck.

Contested Village is another "needs to be in every deck" card. Warpstone Excavation is close behind. As for faction specific staples, you can assume that the cards other races are "splashing" are definitely staples for their own race. Lobber Crew for Orcs, Seduced by Darkness for Chaos, We Need Your Blood for Dark Elves, and Clan Moulder's Elite for all Destruction decks. Demolition for Dwarves, Judgement of Verena (along with Will of the Electors) for Empire. Which takes us to the next Q&A...

If your opponent is playing a blue capital board then YES, you need to be developing every turn. If your opponent is playing any order board and developing themselves, then YES, you should be developing every turn.

Anyway I think the card pool is relatively small enough right now, especially spread out among 6 factions, that you'll quickly figure out which cards are going into every "race here" deck you build.

You should not forget that with Abandoned Mine you have access to your developments every new turn so they are quite variable even from turn 1.

Multiple Heros are good because they can have gameturning features and getting them destroyed can be a huge drawback. If you could play that same card in your next turn your opponent has to figure out a new strategy to remove that unit.

-My list of staples is pretty short:

Contested Village

That's the only card I have in every decklist (I have 15-20 floating around). If you break it down by allegiance:

Destruction:

Warpstone Excavation

Seduced By Darkness (might change post-Assault)

Order:

Innovation

-Most of my decks have at least one hero and most have 2-3. The Skaven heroes are fragile but powerful and should be run in multiple. Thyrus is even more fragile and can be run in multiple. The HE heroes are more about their ability than their starts, and so it probably doesn't matter what zone they end up in. You could probably run one of each and an extra of your favorite.

-There are no hard and fast rules about where to play guys (other than unit restrictions). Most decks play to support zones on the first turn or two and then transition to offense at varying rates. The matchup and opening draws can drastically change how many cards you want to draw and how many resources you want to generate. Look at your average card cost: that should be your ultimate ratio of Kingdom to Quest hammers (though you might shade a bit towards Quest to account for developments). Do consider whether you are able to "spike" your card draw and then it back down. If you can't, then you also have to consider the danger of a decking loss.

-Developments also depend on the matchup and draw. Empire makes them much more important. Other than that, you can kind of guesstimate whether developing will buy you a turn. And, obviously, you want to consider whether you have anything better to do with your cards. It's rarely worth forgoing a real play to put out a development (though, again, Empire changes everything).

Totally agree with CyberFunk here.

My staples would include (and these are, of course, situationally dependent):

1. Contested Village - At this point, it's still nearly a must in every deck.
2. Warpstone Excavation - It's only danger is that it CAN hurt you depending on the deck you face and/or play with
3. Innovation - When the game's designer even uses one in his killer Orc deck, you know it's probably close to a must-have card
4. Any kind of Support card Destruction - Usually these kinds of cards (e.g., Pillage for Destruction decks, Demolition for Order) are fairly good to have
5. Mass-Unit Destruction (aka Reset cards) - These have proven to be very helpful emergency escape pods, of sorts, for when things aren't going well

As far as when and/or where to place units, it's really all just situational and relative based on your initial card draws, the way the game is going, and overall luck of the draw. That's one of the most insanely fun decisions in the game, imho, and key to what first drew me to this excellent game. That sense of ongoing tactical decision-making is super fun to mull over and consider on a turn-by-turn basis.

This is how I breakdown Warhammer: Invasion's factions and their key components (again, imho):

Dwarfs - Damage Removal/Reduction, Power Icon Manipulation, Toughness (see: Damage Reduction previously listed), useful attachments

Empire - Unit Movement between Zones, Counterstrike, Powerful tactics and support cards, Counter-effecting cards that can cancel other abilities

High Elves - Unit Returning abilities, Card drawing, Healing, some Card Denial, Sturdy Combat units (Dragon Mage, other Dragon units)

Dark Elves - Card Denial/Manipulation, some Rush capabilities, Sniping (aka Unit Removal), HP adjustment (see: Sniping), Counterstrike/Toughness, Sacrificing-triggered abilities

Chaos - Corruption abilities, Powerful Combat Units (Bloodthirster, Chaos Knights, Unclean One), Direct Damage tactics and powers, some Rush abilities, some Sacrificing-based abilities

Orcs - Rush/Speed deck, Super powerful mass-attacking capabilities, Strong supports, Damage-created benefits

Thanks again guys. Tomorrow I will be playing so much of this game. Thanks for all this advice.

Wytefang said:

Pretty much agree with this, though I pick up my three boxes of Assault today and I'm sure I'll find something to add (probably High Elf Distain 3x in every order deck!)

People have already also given the type of advide I'd give regarding developments. Cyberfunk's advice on developments is pretty much identical to what I was going to write. Always developments against Empire every turn from the start and express mild surprise if you find he isn't running Judgement, because the other 95% of Empire players will. Though generally, against most Order decks given Wytefang's comment about board reset basically being a staple card, I'd be laying down developents from the start against most order decks.

In answer to your question Curator, Dwarfs aren't really a control deck currently. Their concentration of toughness, damage cancellation, high health/survivability and generally low power makes them a very mixed bag. High Elves and Empire do control much, much better.

One thing I do like about this game though is how fast things change. with an expansion every month, the cardpool rapidly makes assumptions about what is good and whats not change. Just two months ago Skaven were mildly interesting, now they have all the toys to be a very solid deck (with Dark Elf rats being something I definately intend to build when I get my boxes today!)