8 thoughts on “Poll 41: Which zone do you usually try to burn first?

  1. Junglecat

    Depends on whether or not I think the player will defend, how important the life of my attacking unit/s is/are, and whether or not I’m hoping to goad that player into defending with certain units of his that are cramping my style.
    In the end went with The Stoneman.

    Reply
  2. bitva

    In general I go for the Kingdom for several reasons; to dissuade my opponent from playing into the Battlefield (I fear rush strategies because they are the antithesis of my play style since the early days of Magic), to encourage defending against my units with the plan that by doing so, it will impede resource escalation by my opponent, and to encourage him to play units in the kingdom where they will not assist in card draw or in attacking my zones.

    Only marginally related tot he topic, but I do see that many inexperienced players or players that don’t change what they do much from game to game tend to attack a fully healthy zone with something like 7 damage rather than attacking a zone with only 2 or 3 health remaining. I understand that they want to apply the full 7 damage, but I usually go for the zone that will burn when put in the same situation. What do other Winvasion readers do in such a situation, or what would be a more likely play by tournament-goers in the same situation?

    Reply
    1. Junglecat

      Good question bitva! I would be one of those players that would go for putting the 7 dmg on the healthier zone. Then it leaves your opponent with TWO different zones on the verge of collapse, not knowing which one you might choose to finish off next. I suppose you could go for the “sure thing” and burn the weakened zone, but I think that as that zone was already in trouble your opponent would be more likely to be ready with some nasty ambushers or other such hijinx, leaving you with a higher chance of being weakened before having to go after another zone which would be untouched as of yet.
      But this is the thought process of someone who hasn’t played organized tournaments

      Reply
    2. sammann11

      I agree with Junglecat – go for 2 zones on the verge of collapse. Then he won’t be sure where to play the unit next. Getting their zone to burn is nice, but if I can cripple them in 2 zones, I’ll most often take it.

      Reply
  3. bitva

    I have never played a tournament either (except the release tournament at GenCon 09). I see the sense in what you stated with putting the opponent in a situation in which he has two zones in dire straights and will have to guess what comes next. Can’t say I’ve ever been in fear of my opponent laying down some ambushing developments, though. Ambush just hadn’t reached an effective level of development for most situations. Seems they were making improvements to it with HK, but alas, we will have to hope Forever War brings that idea to where it needs to be.

    Reply
  4. sammann11

    I go for the Battlefield – most of the time. It depends, of course, on what deck I am playing and my opponent is playing. But I’ve always figured that if I burn that first, he’ll be more likely to be forced into putting units in the other 2 zones, which he can’t attack from.

    There’s usually the least amount of defenders in the Quest zone. So I usually start the game looking at that as a gimmie, a zone to attack later.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *