In order to answer this, we must list the problems (and strengths) of Magic: the gathering

This is by no means an exhaustive list. Please feel free to amend it.

Strengths
1. Most popular collectible card game
2. Magic is still popular after 9 (?) years
3. Wizards of the Coast (proprietor's of M:tg) is not in danger of
going out of business or losing its licenses (anyone remember
Fasa?)




Problems
1. Magic has produced many restricted and banned cards.
2. Magic has immensely legalistic wordings/rulings
3. New Magic expansions tend to make obsolete previous
strategies, requiring players to make further card investments
4. Many "new" Magic cards released in its current expansions are
just knock-offs of earlier cards


Applying these criteria to Mage Knight, we might arrive at these conclusions

Strenghths
1. Most popular collectible miniatures game
2. Simple rules that allow for complex battles
3. Wizkids (Mage Knight's proprietor) is finacially stable

(Potential) Problems
1. Will Mage Knight release restricted or banned figures?
2. Will the rules become unbearably legalistic?
3. Will new expansions make old strategies obsolete, requiring us
to buy more figures?
4. It seems that some of Sinister's figures are imitations of
previous figures.

I don't really object to "new" figures that duplicate the powers of "old" figures so much with FIGURES as I do with CARDS. I mean, how much new can they really do without unbalancing the game?

I quit MtG when they divided official tourneys into categories (type 1, 2, 3...) and I couldn't use my cards anymore. I spent a lot of money to get some cards (Four Mahamoti Djiin, Drop of Honey, Isle of Wak Wak, Guardian Beast, four Mana Drains, a pile of dual lands, Birds of Paradise, Forks, Underworld Dreams, Nova Pentacle, Preacher, Word of Command, etc.) and they became almost useless.

I hope it doesn't happen to MK. If it does, I'll quit the next day.

Many people feel the same way Battle master.

We can only hope that MK learns from M:tg's mistakes.

It's easy to focus on Magic's weaknesses but hopefully MK will also learn from Magic's strengths

Nope. The company has said they will not.

How long is a piece of string?

Both questions are so subjective that they're unanswerable.

IMO MK will always remain a simple game; new rules are not needed to keep it fresh.

Have they now? An attack of 10 for 3 damage will always be that; nothing will obsolete it.

So? Don't buy them then.

The comparison between M:tG and MK is fundamentally flawed because the medium is so completely different. The *only* commonality is the way they are are sold - as collectable.

Other than that they have nothing in common.

My predictions:

1) MK will stabilize, with full blown expansions coming out much less often.

Why? Because WK is not a one-shot-wonder company. They're run by Gamers, who will grow their company by coming out with new games, rather than depending on a single game for their income.

2) Add ons will be in the form of campaigns, advanced/optional rules, specialized terrain, and individual figs. As well as things I'm not imaginative to think up.

M:tG MUST bring out new cards, because there is no other way to keep play fresh and new! MK doesn't need to do that, because it is a game system with an inifinte variety of situations that can be created.

Wow. Sometimes I think MK players have never played a real Wargame before they came to Mage Knight, and think that the Magic formula for play is the only one there can possibly be.

3) MK will continue to gain popularity as a game *and* toy, because it is visual and simple, not because there is always something new added to it.

We geeks that waste our time online, worry about tournament rules, debate over the virtues of Fling & Ping, are the minority of the market! WK makes their money by selling games that are toys, not just games. Toy soldiers have always been with us; WK has simply tapped into that fact.

hmmmm, a magic dunce..... there are alot of those on these boards:rolleyes:


As to your problems-
1. totally wrong. Out of 40k cards only 55 or so are banned/restricted
2. not really, timing causes the most problems
3. wrong again, new expansions are getting weaker and weaker as wizards puts more priority on type 2 and limited
4. do you mean reprints with different names, if so I agree, but if you are talking about a small tweak... small tweaks mean big changes.

MK problems-
1. They said they will not, and which fig needs to be banned? There is already a restricted list- it is called uniques.

2. they already are

3. has not happened so far

4. which ones?

Mage Knight is much better than Magic (or any other card game) in my opinion.
This is because 1) they have a point formula and 2) miniature games are more fun than card games.

Now having said that, it seems naive to me NOT to compare Mage Knight with Magic. Yes, they are different in many ways. But the focus of this thread is to explore if Mage Knight will learn from Magic's mistakes and from Magic's successes. Are you telling me, Balduran I, that if ever there was a faulty comparison, it's a comparison between Mage Knight and Magic?

I like Mage Knight more than most other strategy games. I think they have the potential to weather the storm and be around for a long time. I think it would be unfortunate for Mage Knight not to learn from others' mistakes and triumphs.

42up-- I said in my original post that Magic has made many banned and restricted cards. Your reply is "totally wrong" because there are only 55. 55 seems like a lot. Certainly a small percentage of all the cards out there, but still a large number in absolute terms. Isn't timing a ruling issue? Are you going to win over new recruits to Magic by telling them that the rules are simple but the timing issues arouse problems? This seems like hair-splitting to me.

With respect, yes.

Take away the Starter/Booster from Mage Knight. Imagine it.

Now, knowing both games, M:tG and MK (M:tG as it is today, MK sold in sets, without the randomness of starters/boosters), tell me why we would be comparing them?

What's to compare? One is a card game, the other a miniatures game. Truth is, one is a game with a very narrow way to play; MK is more of a system, a 'build your own game' game. Note that there are *dozens* of other games out there along the same lines; many board, many miniature, (and many dead and gone because the companies went under).

The biigest problems I have with MTG is the Type issue. As long as there is no type 1 or typre 2 MK then I will be more happy. I really would be PO'ed if My anunub just became unuseable excpet in Type 1 format. Not to mention the De-Valueing of older figures (I can only use Storm Golem in old tourney's? Forget that!) Ranking is cool Banning is dumb but they said they wouldn't do that so that's good as for restricting things they already did They call restricted pieces Uniques, get it? So I think everything will be good till someone thinks Types are an issue. The other Big problem I see is Flooding the market 3-4 sets a year can break ANYONES bank book I have problems keeping up with 2-3 (if you opt to count dungeons) I see a positive in the fact that I can buy a case ($240) and get PRETTY close to a set with Magic I could buy a case (6 boxes, 90 each 540) and maybe get a set and probably not get 4 of one given card to even make a deck. Well questions? comments?

Just a thought.

I do NOT underestimate the importance of marketing! The "collectable" scheme may indeed be largely responsible for MKs (and other dial games), success. I don't know.

But if it is then there are indeed lessons to be learned from CCG that are here, and those that are gone. And M:tG would probably be about the best to learn from, being the Grand Daddy of them all.

It's just that those lessons should probably be about the marketing, not about the game play.

To say that M:tG is the top CCG because it is, objectively, The Best Game of the CCGs... is reaching. In my experience some excellent games just never get the critical mass to succeed, while some mediocre ones become huge. So why draw any conclusions about MK game play from a game that's really not even similar, and that probably isn't even the 'best of breed' out there for it's genre anyway?

1. Will Mage Knight release restricted or banned figures? '

WizKids has said on numerous occasions that every figure they release, with the exception of some promo figures, will be legal for tournament play.

2. Will the rules become unbearably legalistic?

I don't think so, because of the way the rules are constructed in the first place. In Magic, every card can theoretically do something completely different from every other card, introducing a staggering number of unforseen interactions.

In Mage Knight, what figures can do are established by the rules, and the Special Abilities Card. The interaction between one Special Ability and another can be illustrated in general terms, and therefore apply to all other instances of that interaction, regardless of what figures have the abilities. Such generalization is difficult to achieve in a game such as Magic.

3. Will new expansions make old strategies obsolete

I'm sure it's possible, but on a large scale this hasn't happened yet... with the possible exception of turtle armies getting seriously hampered by Limited Invisibility.

4. It seems that some of Sinister's figures are imitations

Maybe so. Some are better than their counterparts, some aren't.
(Woodland Snipers may look and smell like Rangers, but IMO the **Woodland Sniper is better than any Ranger.) There are only a finite number of sensible combinations of special abilities, range, arc, and the like.

No.:mad:

Balduran I-- I found your last post much more poignant.

The similarities between Mage Knight and Magic

1. Mage Knight is the "Grand daddy" of its genre a la Magic.
2. Both are collectible games.
3. Both sell "pieces" that have the rules printed on them (as
opposed to games which require additional rule books, charts
and tables.)
4. Both release expansions that are simply additional "pieces"
that players add to their collection.
5. Magic and Mage Knight have identical market penetration.
Shops that sell esoteric games like Dungeons and Dragons and
Warhammer also sell Magic and Mage Knight. Shops that sell
traditional games like Monopoly and Risk also sell Magic and
Mage Knight.

As such, I think Mage Knight has a lot in common with Magic.

<As I smile knowingly>

Notice that 3 of your 5 points are only about marketing. And number 3 is simply an innovation in record keeping; it doesn't change the fundamentals of the kind of game each is.

As I said, there is commonality: in the way they're sold. But not in the games themselves. :)

Just wait a bit longer, you'll see that MK is going the way of MTG. And hey, at least MTG didn'release 400 card deck rules with a new card type:p