I guess we can all agree it was fail. I dont see any competitive deck using it. I`ve seen Strifecro trying to use the pally`s turtle yesterday but he gave up after losing the joust to a face hunter. Maybe it would be a little better if you dont autolose when there was actually a tie? What you all think blizzard should do to fix Jouster?
Strifecro playing Jouster instead of healbot in that deck, regardless of the fact that he had Zombie chow in the list, is just a hilarious oversight. So odd to me that someone as well regarded as strife would make that decision willingly.
Overall, I think joust is horrible. I don't think you should win in a tie either. Maybe if they added conditions for a tie.
At the very least the edge should go to the jouster and win the ties. And to make Joust more interesting there needs to be a minion that grows +1/+1 if you lose a joust and +2/+2 if you win. Right now Joust minions play in a vacuum.
best joust is kings elekk. i play it on a beast hunter deck and it doesnt even matter if he gets you a card or not but if he does i just paid for a 2 mana 3/2 "draw 1 of your big minions" which is more than good
The way it's implemented is so stupid. Why not give the player some control over it?
Like draw from your hand instead of deck or even better let players rearrange cards in hand and have the joust card say use the left or right most card. That way both players would be involved and you would actually have something to do when it's not your turn.
But no the game needs to be dumbed down with more complete randomness apparently to Blizzard.
I don't think it's a mechanic designed for most decks - you need a deck with heavy hitting cards like Control Warrior or maybe Ramp/Aviana Druid. It's more of a niche card if anything.
People here can't evaluate joust, they only like shiny effects and bubbles "Ugh, I lose joust sometimes? I hate losing joust, so stupid, joust unplayable". The truth is, with many of these cards, winning even 30% of the time is enough to increase your win rate overall.
Ties should redraw cards until a proper winner/loser is determined. As long as ties lose the joust, joust will always suck.
I reckon Blizzard didn't make this decision because rounds could go on indefinitely, especially if there is only 1 card left in each deck with the same mana cost.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
My legendary count excluding adventure legendaries, dupes and old murk eye: 40
gadgetzan and the taunt/shield. having another taunt is a good thing for wallet, gives me time to ysera/varian/grommash/alextraza. gadetzan i consider another removal spell, just throw it into the2 drops.
Guys I forgot about the elephant... sometime you get a lucky boom or highmane, ok... i guess its the only one playable... about the gadgetzan on CW its awful imo, i dont think you need 1 drops in cw, and if you do, zombie is infinite better... its not like you going to face rush your opponent early on as cw.
Ties should redraw cards until a proper winner/loser is determined. As long as ties lose the joust, joust will always suck.
This has a potential for endless loop. Imagine a Malygos shaman vs a mage that only has Ysera left in deck, and playing say Master Jouster. It will be Ysera vs Malygos and no alternatives, this is a draw, so new joust should be run, and there are no minions in either deck to draw for more. Oops.
Ties should redraw cards until a proper winner/loser is determined. As long as ties lose the joust, joust will always suck.
This has a potential for endless loop. Imagine a Malygos shaman vs a mage that only has Ysera left in deck, and playing say Master Jouster. It will be Ysera vs Malygos and no alternatives, this is a draw, so new joust should be run, and there are no minions in either deck to draw for more. Oops.
So you are telling me there are no conditions in programming?
So you are telling me there are no conditions in programming?
I say that with *current* joust implementation resolving ties by repeating joust has a potential for endless loop. And I told that to @Sincere, not to you.
I think people are looking at it wrong in two ways.
A) Some joust cards are good, some are average, some are bad. The same way there's good and bad battlecry's, deathrattle's etc.
B) The good joust cards are good to the point where even if you get them 30% of the time, it's enough to push you ahead in those games to visibly increase your win/loss ratio. Examples are the elekk where it doesn't even matter too much if it misses as it's a still a 3/2 for 2 and if it does hit it, sweetness; and healing wave, which if it loses the joust is 1 less heal than healbot for two less mana, and if it wins, is six more than the bot!
This.
Also, I think that seeing an opponent's minion also has value. For example, am I facing a Midrange Hunter or Face Hunter, well he just jousted a Wolf Rider, so most likely Face, now I can play the matchup a bit differently.
Easy enough; just don't let the re-reveal pick the same cards. As a joust is an auto-lose with 0 cards in deck, it wouldn't be infinite.
Well, this is a working solution indeed. And should someone have more minions, they will win jousts by exhaustion in case of full ties. The problem is that joust animation will take undetermined time (~5s per pair), so you can potentially run out of time just by watching the joust.
go write that on a card, or better don't write it and go answer to allllllllllllllllllllllll the bug thread about people who would not understand why they lost the Joust because they had no minions left in their deck.
Well, this is solvable by introducing a keyword, like with "taunt" or "battlecry". Currently, "joust" is a name of the mechanics, but it can be turned into a keyword, this way the full joust description can be viewed by examining the card in the library, like with other keywords. A description like "Reveal a minion in each deck. The minion with higher mana cost wins the joust. Ties are resolved by revealing more minions. If a player's deck runs out of minions, that player loses the joust. If both decks run out of minions at once, the joust is a draw." can explain the mechanics in its fullest.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
There is a lot of steak here...
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I guess we can all agree it was fail. I dont see any competitive deck using it. I`ve seen Strifecro trying to use the pally`s turtle yesterday but he gave up after losing the joust to a face hunter. Maybe it would be a little better if you dont autolose when there was actually a tie? What you all think blizzard should do to fix Jouster?
Strifecro playing Jouster instead of healbot in that deck, regardless of the fact that he had Zombie chow in the list, is just a hilarious oversight. So odd to me that someone as well regarded as strife would make that decision willingly.
Overall, I think joust is horrible. I don't think you should win in a tie either. Maybe if they added conditions for a tie.
At the very least the edge should go to the jouster and win the ties. And to make Joust more interesting there needs to be a minion that grows +1/+1 if you lose a joust and +2/+2 if you win. Right now Joust minions play in a vacuum.
Dependable loan sharks since 1960. We sink our teeth into every deal we make.
i actually run a couple jousts in my wallet warrior.
I built a deck around this.
2 Annoying Bots... and then some 4s and 5s with a lot of the cards going higher.
...The Annoy Bots ALWAYS are selected to joust!
Priest (60) / Warrior (49) / Hunter (47) / Mage (45) / Warlock (36) / Druid (35) / Shaman (34) / Paladin (33) / Rogue (19)
best joust is kings elekk. i play it on a beast hunter deck and it doesnt even matter if he gets you a card or not but if he does i just paid for a 2 mana 3/2 "draw 1 of your big minions" which is more than good
Ties should redraw cards until a proper winner/loser is determined. As long as ties lose the joust, joust will always suck.
The way it's implemented is so stupid. Why not give the player some control over it?
Like draw from your hand instead of deck or even better let players rearrange cards in hand and have the joust card say use the left or right most card. That way both players would be involved and you would actually have something to do when it's not your turn.
But no the game needs to be dumbed down with more complete randomness apparently to Blizzard.
I don't think it's a mechanic designed for most decks - you need a deck with heavy hitting cards like Control Warrior or maybe Ramp/Aviana Druid. It's more of a niche card if anything.
Most of the midrange hunters that I have played against are using King's Ellekk.
People here can't evaluate joust, they only like shiny effects and bubbles "Ugh, I lose joust sometimes? I hate losing joust, so stupid, joust unplayable". The truth is, with many of these cards, winning even 30% of the time is enough to increase your win rate overall.
I reckon Blizzard didn't make this decision because rounds could go on indefinitely, especially if there is only 1 card left in each deck with the same mana cost.
My legendary count excluding adventure legendaries, dupes and old murk eye: 40
$$$ spent on this game: 0
Check out my card collection: http://www.hearthpwn.com/members/MCFUser175154/collection
gadgetzan and the taunt/shield. having another taunt is a good thing for wallet, gives me time to ysera/varian/grommash/alextraza. gadetzan i consider another removal spell, just throw it into the2 drops.
Guys I forgot about the elephant... sometime you get a lucky boom or highmane, ok... i guess its the only one playable... about the gadgetzan on CW its awful imo, i dont think you need 1 drops in cw, and if you do, zombie is infinite better... its not like you going to face rush your opponent early on as cw.
This has a potential for endless loop. Imagine a Malygos shaman vs a mage that only has Ysera left in deck, and playing say Master Jouster. It will be Ysera vs Malygos and no alternatives, this is a draw, so new joust should be run, and there are no minions in either deck to draw for more. Oops.
There is a lot of steak here...
So you are telling me there are no conditions in programming?
Healing Wave got his spot in totem and midrange shaman 4sure
I say that with *current* joust implementation resolving ties by repeating joust has a potential for endless loop. And I told that to @Sincere, not to you.
There is a lot of steak here...
This.
Also, I think that seeing an opponent's minion also has value. For example, am I facing a Midrange Hunter or Face Hunter, well he just jousted a Wolf Rider, so most likely Face, now I can play the matchup a bit differently.
Well, this is a working solution indeed. And should someone have more minions, they will win jousts by exhaustion in case of full ties. The problem is that joust animation will take undetermined time (~5s per pair), so you can potentially run out of time just by watching the joust.
Well, this is solvable by introducing a keyword, like with "taunt" or "battlecry". Currently, "joust" is a name of the mechanics, but it can be turned into a keyword, this way the full joust description can be viewed by examining the card in the library, like with other keywords. A description like "Reveal a minion in each deck. The minion with higher mana cost wins the joust. Ties are resolved by revealing more minions. If a player's deck runs out of minions, that player loses the joust. If both decks run out of minions at once, the joust is a draw." can explain the mechanics in its fullest.
There is a lot of steak here...