Topic: Mana curve for Warhammer decks

For Magic and Warcraft, I've made graphs on the deck tools page that show the cost distribution of cards in a deck (i.e. the mana curve). Having never played Warhammer yet, I'm asking you guys if you think such a graph is relevant for your decks, and if so, how I should implement it.

If there were only static costs for cards, I'd have just implemented it as a cost graph, like for WoW, but I'm not sure how to fit the loyalty costs in there so that it is relevant.

Any opinions welcome.

  • Locke
  • New member
  • Offline

Re: Mana curve for Warhammer decks

With MtG I knew what mana curves worked for various decks. I haven’t built and played Warhammer enough to really understand the resource/loyalty curve well. Thinking about it just now, I’d try to expose as much information as possible. Would it be possible to do a 2d graph plotting resource costs against loyalty? I’m not sure how useful it would be, but I feel that it would be more useful than just resources or just resource + loyalty. A 2d graph would give insight into what you can play on the first turn (3 resource, 1 loyalty or 2 resource, 2 loyalty or similar) which I think is one of the more important aspects of a mana curve in general.

Re: Mana curve for Warhammer decks

Locke wrote:

With MtG I knew what mana curves worked for various decks. I haven’t built and played Warhammer enough to really understand the resource/loyalty curve well. Thinking about it just now, I’d try to expose as much information as possible. Would it be possible to do a 2d graph plotting resource costs against loyalty? I’m not sure how useful it would be, but I feel that it would be more useful than just resources or just resource + loyalty. A 2d graph would give insight into what you can play on the first turn (3 resource, 1 loyalty or 2 resource, 2 loyalty or similar) which I think is one of the more important aspects of a mana curve in general.

Yeah, when I'm building decks I find it much more useful to consider what portion of the deck I can play, and want to play, on turn one; and what options that gives me for turn two dependent on what I played on one. A mana curve isn't as important in Warhammer Invasion as resources can ramp up so fast its almost negligible if that's the kind of deck you want to build. In Magic you have the one-land-a-turn which forces the game into a specific flow unless you're running acceleration, in Invasion you can gain accelerate as fast or as slow as you want to, and cards like Innovate and Hate complicate things even further.

Re: Mana curve for Warhammer decks

lordmalinari wrote:
Locke wrote:

With MtG I knew what mana curves worked for various decks. I haven’t built and played Warhammer enough to really understand the resource/loyalty curve well. Thinking about it just now, I’d try to expose as much information as possible. Would it be possible to do a 2d graph plotting resource costs against loyalty? I’m not sure how useful it would be, but I feel that it would be more useful than just resources or just resource + loyalty. A 2d graph would give insight into what you can play on the first turn (3 resource, 1 loyalty or 2 resource, 2 loyalty or similar) which I think is one of the more important aspects of a mana curve in general.

Yeah, when I'm building decks I find it much more useful to consider what portion of the deck I can play, and want to play, on turn one; and what options that gives me for turn two dependent on what I played on one. A mana curve isn't as important in Warhammer Invasion as resources can ramp up so fast its almost negligible if that's the kind of deck you want to build. In Magic you have the one-land-a-turn which forces the game into a specific flow unless you're running acceleration, in Invasion you can gain accelerate as fast or as slow as you want to, and cards like Innovate and Hate complicate things even further.

Yeah, I'm playing Wake the Mountain/Innovation in my Dwarf deck atm and thats certainly something which screws completely with the concept of a mana curve and can be pretty deck defining.

That isn't to say I find the concept of a "mana curve" useless and I certainly think (which lordmalinari above alludes to) that a good understanding of cost will help in good deckbuilding, particularly in the current rush dominated meta in which games are usually quite short (oh, how I hope this meta changes soon....) in which you may only get 4-5 turns in total and so what you can drop at the start becomes very important.

Re: Mana curve for Warhammer decks

don't know if this helps, but when i made decks in excel, i had a few automatic pie charts set up for each sheet (Deck) to show the ratios at a glance:

-qty of: units/tactics/supports/attachments/quests

-costs of: units/supports [that supply power to KZ] (tactics like Innovation, Hate i'd include here as well)

So for a mono-race deck I'd see at a glance the percentage of units & supports that could go into KZ turn 1 to provide resources (Shrine to Taal & Errant Wolf,  wouldnt be tagged for instance). Also part of that chart would be possible turn 2 units/supports (if an Empire turn 1 unit/support can be played in KZ, Gate of Sigmar would be tagged as turn 2). Innovation tagged as turn 1. Similar process for 2-race decks.

Problem with this method is user would probably have to tag their cards manually because many cards are situational, based on which capital board you're using: Dwarf Cannon Crew would be tagged turn 1 only if you're using Dwarf board, otherwise it's turn 2. Sure IF you had Innovation it could be turn 1, but the chances of drawing both in opening hand aren't enough to warrant turn 1 status for Dwarf Cannon Crew in a non-dwarf capital deck imo.  Also, cards like Bright Wizard Apprentice: I want it in QZ, but if that's the only thing i draw turn 1 that provides power, I'll play to KZ as a last resort. All other times i'd consider it a turn 2 & beyond card. This comes down to play-style, even though i'd think most empire players would do the same, given their mobility.

Unless you did some crazy mathematics & programming voodoo, would be easiest to add manual tags i'd think

Last edited by Artemus_Maximus (2010-04-03 19:35:02)

Re: Mana curve for Warhammer decks

but then again that kind of goes out of the window if you consider: Grimgor's Camp on turn 1, Ugrok Beardburna turn 2. Or We'z Bigga x3 or x2 + Innovation, Ugrok Beardburna on turn 1. So how is he classified? depends on what the chances are of getting him out turn 1 vs. turn 2 vs. turn 3 is the way i think about it. But others may see it as by himself, he cannot be played turn 1. Or turn 2 unless you played 2 power in KZ on turn 1, which isn't always the case. In the deck I run, he can come out turn 2 most of the time, turn 1 a small portion of the time. So I'd classify as turn 3 & beyond because of that & because i'd rather develop KZ further if i have the time to.

Last edited by Artemus_Maximus (2010-04-03 20:40:58)