Re: [心得] 高手論職業強度 4月份 (法師篇)
第9名 法師
With the new season under way, we will begin to see some experimentation with
the Mage class. Trump’s past success in achieving legend with the budget
Mage has seen a spike in Mage play compared to its Priest and Paladin
counterparts. Mage’s greatest weapon is that once it has established board
control, it is often very hard to lose it unless you overextend or misplay.
However at its core Mage remains one of the most reactive classes in the
game, with potentially only Mana Wyrm and Water Elemental as empty board
drops. Often this means that powerful spells such as Polymorph, Fireball and
Flamestrike sit in our hand until we are able to play them on our opponents'
minions.
隨著新賽季的進行 我們可以看到一些法師牌組的實驗
Trump用無課金法師達到傳說階級
造成的是和牧師聖騎士比起來 法師數量大幅增加
(不太確定see a spike in是不是這樣翻? 敬請指正)
法師最強大的武器就是 當他已有場優 通常很難輸掉 除非躁進或失誤
然而重點是法師是遊戲中僅存的 最有反應性的職業
通常很可能只有法力龍鰻和水元素是會空下的
這意味著那些強力的法術 像是羊 火球 烈焰風暴
很可能會一直扣在手上 直到我們能夠將之反應在對手的手下為止
Another significant issue when compared other counter archetypes is that
Mages have no mechanic that is able to provide card draw and affect either
tempo or life at the same time. Druids have Ancient of Lore and Wrath while
Warriors have Shield Block. This means that if we haven’t established our
win condition by turn 7-9, we start running out of cards and eventually top
deck significantly less valuable cards. Furthermore, Mage lacks the class
cards to build a solid board during turns 5 and 6, which often end up in
playing 4 drop minions on these turns. By nature, these 4 drops don’t match
up with creatures such as Fire Elemental or Ancient of Lore. This is clearly
seen in the clogged 4 slot where Mages have Water Elemental, Fireball,
Polymorph and often Defender of Argus.
另一個明顯的議題是 和其他職業相比
法師沒有良好的機制 可以同時提供抽牌+效果(不論是節奏或生命)
德魯伊有知識古樹和憤怒 同時戰士有盾牌格擋
這意味著如果我們沒有在T7~9建立我們勝利的條件
我們就會開始缺手牌 最後演變成每回合都只能抽一張很可能價值較低的牌
還有 法師缺乏能在T5和6建立堅實場優的職業牌
這通常會以在這些回合中下4費生物作收
很自然地 這些4費生物比不上像是火元素或知識古樹這類生物
這點可以非常清楚地從法師4費鎖死水元素 火球 變羊 和時有出現的阿古斯看出來
Perhaps Mage's greatest weakness is its inability to remain consistent versus
aggro match-ups as our removal often takes our entire turn. This means that
even if we clear the board, the initiative is given back to our opponent who
can flood the board again. The only advantage that we gain compared to other
classes is that our hero power does not require us to take damage when we
ping minions. Often Mage versus aggro match-ups are determined whether or not
you have a Mana Wyrm in your starting hand or your opponent has a terrible
draw and whether you can survive till turn 7.
或許法師最大的弱點是他沒有能力去保持對快攻侵略牌組的反抗
因為我們的移除手段通常會吃掉我們整個回合
這表示就算我們真的把場面清空 先手權也會又再次回到對手身上
而他們卻可以再度瞬間快速鋪場
我們唯一的優勢就是和其他職業相比 我們的天生技在清怪時不需要去吃傷害
通常法師面對侵略牌組 勝負會取決於
起手有沒有濾到法力龍鰻或者你的對手牌神爛
還有你能不能存活到T7
Mage has incredible potential because of the power of its class spells, but
it lacks the X factor which allows it to consistently compete with the top
tier classes in the meta. Often Mages play the trading game hoping to have a
significant board on turn 7 where we can Flamestrike to win the game. Our “
reach” is often cast to trade with minions leaving us with very little
options in the late game. In truth, you may as well be playing Shaman.
法師因為職業法術的威能而有難以置信的潛力
但是在這個meta下缺乏了可以和其他一流職業競爭的X因子
通常法師會做交換 希望建立能在T7有烈焰風暴清場的場面來贏得遊戲
我們通常會一直用法術換手下 這讓我們後期剩下的選項非常少
(這裡也不確定是不是這樣翻...敬請指正XD)
說實話 要這樣還不如去玩薩滿
Ultimately until new cards are released or more changes to the current cards
are made, Mage is stuck in a tough situation. Many have tried to create the
new thing for Mage using secrets, Enrage minions and reinventing the Frost
Giants but as stated above, they all seem to lack consistency versus many of
the other classes.
最後 直到新卡釋出或是現在的牌有更多的變動
法師一直卡在嚴峻的情勢下 很多人想嘗試創造法師的新玩法
像是秘密、狂怒和重出江湖的巨人冰法
但就像上面統計提到的 面對許多其他職業 他們全都缺乏穩定度
-Mockingjay 本區作者
Decks: 範例牌組
Mockingjay Mage
http://i.imgur.com/fw7ZHe5.jpg
Trump Budget Mage
http://i.imgur.com/Dse4JQl.jpg
--
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc), 來自: 61.60.246.197
※ 文章網址: http://www.ptt.cc/bbs/Hearthstone/M.1397747676.A.CA0.html
→
04/17 23:15, , 1F
04/17 23:15, 1F
※ 編輯: a2364983 (61.60.246.197), 04/17/2014 23:18:31
→
04/17 23:18, , 2F
04/17 23:18, 2F
→
04/17 23:26, , 3F
04/17 23:26, 3F
推
04/17 23:26, , 4F
04/17 23:26, 4F
→
04/17 23:26, , 5F
04/17 23:26, 5F
推
04/17 23:27, , 6F
04/17 23:27, 6F
→
04/17 23:27, , 7F
04/17 23:27, 7F
推
04/17 23:27, , 8F
04/17 23:27, 8F
→
04/17 23:27, , 9F
04/17 23:27, 9F
推
04/17 23:28, , 10F
04/17 23:28, 10F
→
04/17 23:29, , 11F
04/17 23:29, 11F
推
04/17 23:29, , 12F
04/17 23:29, 12F
推
04/17 23:31, , 13F
04/17 23:31, 13F
推
04/17 23:31, , 14F
04/17 23:31, 14F
→
04/17 23:32, , 15F
04/17 23:32, 15F
→
04/17 23:32, , 16F
04/17 23:32, 16F
→
04/17 23:32, , 17F
04/17 23:32, 17F
推
04/17 23:41, , 18F
04/17 23:41, 18F
推
04/17 23:57, , 19F
04/17 23:57, 19F
推
04/18 00:02, , 20F
04/18 00:02, 20F
推
04/18 00:45, , 21F
04/18 00:45, 21F
推
04/18 01:44, , 22F
04/18 01:44, 22F
→
04/18 01:46, , 23F
04/18 01:46, 23F
→
04/18 02:02, , 24F
04/18 02:02, 24F
→
04/18 02:04, , 25F
04/18 02:04, 25F
推
04/18 12:17, , 26F
04/18 12:17, 26F
→
04/18 13:04, , 27F
04/18 13:04, 27F
推
04/18 13:17, , 28F
04/18 13:17, 28F
→
04/18 13:17, , 29F
04/18 13:17, 29F
推
04/18 17:48, , 30F
04/18 17:48, 30F
推
04/19 11:44, , 31F
04/19 11:44, 31F