Editor: Paul Van Der Werk. Monday 26th July 2004.
|
You are: Home -> Articles -> Columns -> Good Games
Editor: Paul Van Der Werk. Monday 26th July 2004.
|
 "Marvel-First Impressions" I started playing Vs almost two weeks ago. Already an obsessive Magic: The Gathering fan, I was aware of Vs from its outset and was intrigued. However, the National Championships of M:tG were looming when Vs began to pick up a following, and I wanted top give myself as good a shot in that tournament as possible. As such, I, as best as I could, ignored the growing group of players shrieking at each other across the room at Sydney Games Centre about such seemingly random subjects as “initiative” and “breakthrough”. I hid my curiosity and managed to maintain focus upon M:tG until Nationals, though it was a close call. Once Nationals was over I had to take a good look at Vs to see what the fuss was about. When picking up a game for the first time, I am a big fan of going straight to the source. For that reason I bought the Marvel starter, X-Men v Brotherhood and pored over the rules. Along with annoying preference for official learning processes, I prefer to learn to play a game with others who are as experienced as I am. Luckily for me, my younger brothers were interested enough to provide some similarly skilled opposition. We played very slowly at first. We struggled with many of the rules. Our interpretation of reinforcement went through many phases before clarification. Our understanding of priority was incredibly sloppy. Our formations were clueless. We made almost ridiculously bad board mistakes. In a nutshell we did everything we should have expected. Yet not once did any of us throw our cards across the room and go back to video games. We never looked at each other after the application of some previously unknown rule with rolling eyes or shaking heads. We played about thirty games that first day without flinching. Gradually our understanding of Vs became more nuanced. We discovered the ability on Destiny was actually worthwhile. My brother surprised me with the Wolverine, Feral Rage + Flying Kick combo, which soon became a game ending seventh-turn play. We would all groan when someone flipped The New Brotherhood to supplement their turn one play. We realised that formation was crucial. As we continued, our play increased in finesse. Attacking with Nightcrawler became a precipice that guaranteed derision if you could not convert a turn two appearance into victory. We began to read each other’s attempts at Fastball Specials, even if there was nothing we could do about it. We learned set up an optimal Colossus through careful boosting and location use. Toad became amazing after a particularly interesting game. The initiative was no longer something to be grabbed with both hands after a successful coin flip, but a matter for careful planning. Quiksilver became embarrassing at times. Even Xavier’s School for Gifted Youngsters + Shadowcat managed to own a few combats! So it was with well-worn cards and pages upon pages of the descent from fifty to often subzero figures littered throughout our house that I was compelled to buy the DC starter last Sunday. Initially my brothers and I thought the cards were much more complicated and in many ways less powerful. The plot twists relied much less on boosting ATK/DEF. We were disappointed by the power-level given to such characters as the Penguin. We were aware that we were playing with what was merely a starter. However, we also understood that the starter usually represents the wider themes of the set in a simplified way. We hammered the Gotham knights against the Arkham Inmates for a bit. Dick Grayson , Nightwing seemed good. After re-reading the card a few times, We realised Mr Freeze was amazing, even if merely because of his 13 DEF. I really liked Bat Signal and Arkham Asylum. The jury is still out on Spoiler. Sometimes Killer Croc was incredible. My brothers insist Two-Face is ok, something I can’t understand. Cassandra Cain, Batgirl is very good, something I became more aware of when she was recruited against me. Overall, I think DC represents an attempt to provide more interesting abilities rather than merely brute force. We tried playing the Marvel starters Vs the DC starters and Marvel came up trumps a substantial amount of the time. This highlights a difficult part of games development. It needs to be noted that it is much more difficult to test the impact certain abilities will have as opposed to sheer power in ATK/DEF. ATK/DEF is the backbone of the game. Any additional abilities must be developed within the context of the relationship between characters and their ATK/DEF. In creating a balanced gaming environment that stays true to the objectives of the game, the safe option is to retain the primacy of ATK/DEF. Particularly in the early stages of the release of Vs, it would be suicide for the developers to slip up or take a risk with an overly powerful card. To make sure the game is well received, basic gameplay must be stressed above all else. I think this is the case with a card like Batman, Dark Knight. Initially my brothers and I thought this card was a house. It was more of a card house; made of large amounts of cards but incredibly fragile for a seven-drop. Many, and for the most part better, players will disagree with me here. However, I think Batman has a particularly dangerous ability that could be abused in combination with other potential developments in the game. For this reason I think R&D may have erred on the side of caution in their creation of Batman, Dark Knight. Batman, Dark Knight has incredible potential, and his ability could become game-breaking in a niche strategy, perhaps one that is not obvious or even available yet. In effect I am defending Batman, Dark Knight from a very narrow perspective. I have no idea how good he is in Limited or a more sophisticated constructed metagame than I am aware of. There is so much more of both DC and Marvel I have yet to explore. In articulating my initial impressions of Vs I am aware of my own perspective of gaming, and how that affects my evaluation. I am a Spike, through and through, to use M:tG terminology. I play for the competition, and am interested in finding the best ways to win a particular game. From this point of view, I think Vs is an excellent game. Much subtle play skill is required and even minor mistakes can be punished ruthlessly. The power of the initiative is inseparable from the incredible pressure to maximise it and plot twists can make even the most obvious play seem terrible in hindsight. Although I am fascinated by the X-Men storyline, I have never been much of a comics fan. Still I find myself quoting Batman, Dark Knight after some spectacular turn. I definitely have well researched opinions on whom I think are the most attractive heroes. I sometime throw Magneto at Professor X just because I think that’s what he’d want me to do. Vs appeals to many niches across the broad and expanding spectrum of gamers, and it is well worth investing time in. Having played so many games with the starters, I feel ready to expand my collection of cards and attempt to build better decks. It came as a pleasant surprise to see many of the more playable cards in the common slot, and Sydney seems to already have a burgeoning trading market. I am not much of a deck designer, preferring to tweak existing decks than search spoilers for undiscovered combinations. Luckily Vs media is already pretty well established for what is still a very new game, and the Constructed metagame is evolving. I am still painfully slow at playing the game, so my forays into Limited may have to wait a while, but hopefully I can break myself in before the next PCQ. Vs seems to be doing really well in Sydney so should you wish to play, you won’t be short of opponents. Hopefully my initial experiences of Vs will prove infectious, and I see you soon! GG’s Alex Brown
|