Planeswalker Arena: Ob Nixilis Reignited

shteev

viewtopic.php?f=39&t=59143#p635759

Hibernum_JC wrote:

Believe it or not, we do test these objectives.

[Deleted User]

Error. No match found.

madwren

In before someone complains that wanting or expecting to achieve every objective is a character flaw.

Yawgmoths_Left_Ilium

shteev wrote:

https://d3go.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=39&t=59143#p635759

Hibernum_JC wrote:

Believe it or not, we do test these objectives.

Remember... rage quitting counts as a win for your opponent. That must be what he means. How are you supposed to kill 6 creatures in under 5 turns when around 1/3 (definitely under, but depending on your bracket probably not by much) of your opponent pool is formed from creatureless decks. If not creatureless, then definitely not creature heavy.

shteev

madwren wrote:

In before someone complains that wanting or expecting to achieve every objective is a character flaw.

I reckon they'll probably try and claim it's just a typo.

ElimGarak

Not only most ob-decks you're facing are creature-less, the 5-level-rule seems unhinged for this April's fool event. At least energy and vehicles have not been forgotten ... Imagine where we'd be without those gems. Can these events get any more stupid? Of course, let's just wait a week, and then we wish this weeks installment back ... Mark my words.

Ohboy

ElimGarak wrote:

Not only most ob-decks you're facing are creature-less, the 5-level-rule seems unhinged for this April's fool event. At least energy and vehicles have not been forgotten ... Imagine where we'd be without those gems. Can these events get any more stupid? Of course, let's just wait a week, and then we wish this weeks installment back ... Mark my words.

I love the genie level trolling.

Wish to face more event decks? Sure!

1433Sage

I think it would have been better if it wasn't kill 6 creatures your opponents control, rather than kill 3 or less... that would make much more sense and actually be somewhat of a challenge. For now , its either win in 5 or kill. No median.
For obnix.... winning with under 20 hp would have been a perfect objective. Its challenging and actually possible. Just not within 5 rounds.

UweTellkampf

1433Sage wrote:

I think it would have been better if it wasn't kill 6 creatures your opponents control, rather than kill 3 or less... that would make much more sense and actually be somewhat of a challenge. For now , its either win in 5 or kill. No median.
For obnix.... winning with under 20 hp would have been a perfect objective. Its challenging and actually possible. Just not within 5 rounds.

I have a strong feeling that you are making 100% reasonable and fun suggestions.
Too bad no one at hibernum gives a flying truck about reasonable and fun.

Ohboy

viewtopic.php?f=31&t=62415

A reminder that some people prefer to have objectives that branch. Just because you don't like it does not mean it's unreasonable.

Mainloop25

Yeah but even though I kind of like either/or objectives too, a speed objective for a mono-black planeswalker doesn't seem that well-thought-out to me. If anyone has a strategy to hit this goal with Ob consistently, I'm all ears.

Ohboy

Mainloop25 wrote:

Yeah but even though I kind of like either/or objectives too, a speed objective for a mono-black planeswalker doesn't seem that well-thought-out to me. If anyone has a strategy to hit this goal with Ob consistently, I'm all ears.

I can't hit both goals at the same time, but using ramp I've managed to put myself in a position to skill 3 by turn 4 a few times. Admittedly, I only had lost legacy/btb charged in hand once.

A lot of it is luck perhaps, but I set it up that way because I've seen someone's ob deck do it to me before using this build(skill 3 on turn 3-4).

Never tried for the lethal because I always gamble for the 6 creature kill as its more heavily weighted.

I have one more round to go and I dropped a game. Guess I could try it.

khurram

Ohboy wrote:

I can't hit both goals at the same time, but using ramp I've managed to put myself in a position to skill 3 by turn 4 a few times. Admittedly, I only had lost legacy/btb charged in hand once.

Clearance required. You managed to put yourself in a position to gather enough loyalty by turn 4 or you happened to find yourself in that position?

Ohboy

khurram wrote:

Ohboy wrote:

I can't hit both goals at the same time, but using ramp I've managed to put myself in a position to skill 3 by turn 4 a few times. Admittedly, I only had lost legacy/btb charged in hand once.

Clearance required. You managed to put yourself in a position to gather enough loyalty by turn 4 or you happened to find yourself in that position?

Well I set up for it because I've seen it can happen relatively often during casual play, but it of course still requires some luck to get there. I have 4 ramp supports that I get on the field as first priority which can get you mad loyalty during "upkeep" phase if you're lucky with gem conversions.

It's not a mythic heavy setup. You can try it yourself. I think I got there 3 times, but only on one of those times actually had the option to kill by turn 5. My best record for trying for both is still at 6 kills and win in 8 turns.

UweTellkampf

Ohboy wrote:

https://d3go.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=31&t=62415

A reminder that some people prefer to have objectives that branch. Just because you don't like it does not mean it's unreasonable.

Ok, I'll clarify: *I* find it unreasonable. And even if I'd agree with 4 people who think contradictory objectives are a good idea, I'd like that being implemented in a purposeful way, and also with some kind of announcement, "hey guys, this is what we have been trying out, a new method for you to *choose* which objectives you want to pursue etc.". In PvE Events you still always have another shot on the second/third objective.

As far I can tell in the forums, many like the objectives to be hard but not to be a chore. I don't mind missing one if I had a realistic chance to have gotten it. In this particular case, even narrowing down the amount of destroyed creatures to 5 would have given me little reason to complain. Still hardly possible but if we both get crazy lucky, the opponent might play 5 creatures and I might destroy them all and finish "in time".

Irgy

If they wanted to make a choice between objectives they should make them worth the same score. Or make the more difficult one worth more as a risk/reward thing. It's a fairly silly excuse for what's clearly just zero thought put into the objective.

DumasAG

Does it matter? The rewards are basically the same, why even try for top points?

shteev

Not easy to kill 6 creatures when someone knows he's very likely to be your opponent and sets up creatureless decks for you to play against.

Ohboy

Irgy wrote:

If they wanted to make a choice between objectives they should make them worth the same score. Or make the more difficult one worth more as a risk/reward thing. It's a fairly silly excuse for what's clearly just zero thought put into the objective.

This is the part I agree with. It should at least be even score.

Szamsziel

shteev wrote:

Not easy to kill 6 creatures when someone knows he's very likely to be your opponent and sets up creatureless decks for you to play against.

Facing blue you should take at least one creature yourself to ensure opp cane take over so you have something to kill...

DumasAG

Szamsziel wrote:

shteev wrote:

Not easy to kill 6 creatures when someone knows he's very likely to be your opponent and sets up creatureless decks for you to play against.

Facing blue you should take at least one creature yourself to ensure opp cane take over so you have something to kill...

Scavenger is a good choice. If the opponent takes two of your scavengers at different times, your kill spells should loop them allowing you to kill 6 creatures.