I’ve been reading and thinking about Codex for many months, especially since I’ve discovered this forum. I’ve read all kinds of interesting strategy discussions regarding the relative merits of certain cards, and other topics - but I’ve not noticed any discussion on what to me seems perhaps the single-most important decision you will make in a game of Codex, but also one of the most mysterious. I refer to the choice of which spec to choose when you build your Tech 2.
Now, I know that there are plenty of popular multicolour builds which are designed to work with one particular Tech 2 choice, with the other 2 specs chosen because of synergies from their spells and/or Tech 1s. For example, from what I can pick up from watching PBF games, the expert’s favourite choice of Past/Peace/Anarchy always goes with Peace for Tech 2, for the Garrison/Drill Sergeant combo, while the other specs play a supporting role with strong spells and heros, as well as probably the two best Tech 3s in the game if needed to finish off. But if you’re playing monocolor, or a slightly less focused multi-color, how do you decide which of your 3 specs to specialise in at Tech 2? All will have some really strong stuff which can win you the game if not answered correctly, but of completely different types - which will you go for?
And you usually have to make this decision pretty early. It’s normal to build your Tech 2 on turn 4, and is possible as early as turn 3 if you’re player 2. And depending on how close you are to a reshuffle and how many cards you’re drawing, you often want to start teching Tech 2 stuff at the end of turn 2 (locked in at the start of turn 3). So you really have very little to base this decision on - a decision on which the fate of the whole game can potentially turn. One player will have a slight advantage in knowing which spec the opponent chose, although this may not compensate for getting to Tech 2 after the opponent (although clearly much here depends on the precise timing of reshuffles, as well as how immediate an impact your Tech 2s will have on the board state). Other than that, you’ve only got how your opponent played for a couple of turns where you only saw starting deck cards and perhaps a couple of Tech 1 units or teched spells. So what do you actually base this decision on? To be more concrete, say you’re playing monored against monogreen (or vice versa). What makes you decide to build Blood Tech 2 as opposed to Fire or Anarchy? If you normally build Blood, say, because it’s simply stronger (if this is true it would be sad for the game’s replayability imo), is there anything the opponent might do that could sometimes cause you to make a different choice? (Concrete examples of this from any matchup are welcomed. It doesn’t have to be red v green, or even monocolor.)
And I’m curious, when people design their “personal” choices of 3 specs to play with, is it always designed with a particular Tech 2 choice in mind, or does anyone play a “deck” where there are 3 specs all of which could be a viable choice at Tech 2, and you expect to make that decision based on the particular circumstances of each game?
Basically, I’m asking because, at this early stage of my learning, and still playing monocolor (although there are a couple of multicolor decks of my own design that I’m thinking about), the choice of which spec to go with feels more or less completely arbitrary to me. “I went with Balance the last 2 times I played green, let’s try Growth now for a change.” So I would value the insight of any experienced player as to what factors are actually relevant in this decision, if you’re trying to win as well as just to have fun. I hope this may lead to some really interesting strategy discussion which could get close to the heart of what this game is actually about