Hearthpwn

Quote from ZardozSpeaks >>

I have to say that I think Oncurvasaur is a terrible card, and particularly bad given this week's challenge.

First of all, what does it have to do with Dinosaurs? I think the card fails that bit of the challenge pretty clearly. Nothing in it's flavor reflects the weeks challenge, beyond using the -saurus suffix to make a pun. But the pun isn't even about dinosaurs, it's about the hearthstone meta (which I'll get to later).

The card's mechanics: it's blatant power creep on Jeweled Scarab, which is already a decent card, if a bit under-valued. It's not a card you see in many decks, but can find a niche position in Zoo decks. If Jeweled Scarab became a 2/1 or a 1/2, I think it'd be a well balanced card you would regularly see in constructed zoo decks across a few classes.

But Oncurvasaur is not balanced. First of all, you have way too much control over the discover effect. Most decks are unlikely to run more than 3-4 different 3 mana cards, not counting duplicates (which never appear in discover effects like Drakonid Operativeanyway).

So what cards would you want extra duplicates of? The creator mentions Shadowform, which doesn't seem broken. Neither would getting extra copies of Shadow Word: Death. I'm really not liking how the card could duplicate legendaries, especially Brann Bronzebeard. But the biggest problem is Kabal Talonpriest. This card is already an extremely powerful card if you can play it on turn 2 or 3. Granting extra copies of it, and giving easier access to it, seems like a very bad idea.

The drawback of having an undamaged hero is a terrible idea as well. This card is either drawn and used early, or it never functions. I'm really against that kind of a card, it only reinforces one of hearthstones biggest problems, the inability to overcome an early board dominance as determined by opening hand RNG. Especially in Arena, but also in the current agro constructed meta, whoever holds the board in the early game often wins. Why make a card that supports this toxic situation and continues to punish control and attrition decks? 

And this then gets to the "meme" portion of the card that I REALLY don't like. Priest already has a reputation for being a "dumb-downed" class. Just curve out your early game, trade favorably and snowball into a victory. The meme goes that you play Wyrmrest Agent, Kabal Talonpriest, Twilight Guardian and Drakonid Operative, in that order and win.

Whether or not this meme, this negative perception, is accurate: that is whether or not priest is a "dumbed down class", is certainly up for debate. But why on earth would you reinforce the meme by naming a card "Oncurvasaur"? While Blizzard likes to use puns in names, I can't ever imagine them using a pun which reflects on a negative view of the game.

When I look at "Oncurvasaur", I really don't know whether it's creator thinks this is a good idea to implement, or they're just sarcastically making a card to mock the current meta.

Quote from Livienna >>

@ Much stuff, wauw.

Quote from HitSlender >>

First, the competition rules basically says to create a Beast minion (or a card that summons a Beast token) with Dinosaur artwork. This does not mean that the card must be 100% a Dinosaur card, with Dinosaur-type of effects (Like Adapt and "Whenever you kill a minion, do x"). Just by making the card fit the main competition rules qualifies it.

Quote from HitSlender >>

Then you compare the card with Jeweled Scarab, and if you don't know, some class minions are MUCH better than the neutral minions, not to name that Goldshire Footman is worse than Voidwalker

I would also dispute that a card should only be designed for constructed. Arena should at least be an afterthought, a consideration to whether the card is balanced. Cards can always be banned in Arena, but that's an untenable solution. The more cards you ban in arena, the worse arena becomes.

Quote from HitSlender .

 Just because that a card's name is an obvious pun (and has a reasonable Battlecry to fit the name), that doesn't make it in any kind of way a message meant for mocking the meta. By this part of your comment, it looks like you're trying to make the card and the creator to look bad, which is extremely scummy IMO.

 It is not my intention to personally attack the card's creator for the purpose of making them look bad. I just think it is a very poorly designed card, and I'm baffled that it's got so many upvotes.

As for the pun in the name, let me explain further why I don't like it. In the HS community, we often create pet names to disparage a card that is deemed overpowered. Dr Boom becomes Dr 7, because he is always played turn 7. Smalltime Buccaneer becomes "Who Goes Thar?" because the audio was so repetitive when you heard it game after game. Flamewreathed Faceless becomes "4 mana 7/7", leaving off the overload (2), because many people consider the overload to be of no consequence.

Whether or not these cards are broken isn't what I want to debate here. My point is that when the community perceives something as unfair, they give it a disparaging name. Lets say Oncurvasaur were instead named Stegosaurus (the dino in the art). Given enough community hostility, given enough games determined by priests curving out with it, the community might disparagingly give the it name "Oncurvasaur".

There is a strong sense that Hearthstone is determined by who can curve out better. While curving out is definitely an important part of the game, most of the time the phrase is brought up in a negative light. "You don't need to consider which card to play, just spend all your mana and curve out."

In that sense, I don't know whether this card is serious, or if it is a troll entry aimed at disparaging the "curve out" nature of how priest is currently perceived to be played.

Quote from Livienna >>

@ZardozSpeaks @HitSlender (and for anyone else who takes a look at this, the card in question is under the spoiler)

 

tl;dr: Yes the card is better on curve, thus the name (which is not meant to mock anything or anyone!), but it's also got some potential use if drawn late. Even on curve, it's not game winning, simply strong card draw. It's a fair point that it would be very strong in Arena, which is why I could see it being changed to an Epic.

 

To be fair, I should also say that Oncurvasaur is not at all the most OP card this week, nor is it the only card I find lacking decent flavor. Further down the same page, Fossilize strikes me as completely broken and a card like Tacosaurus... I don't even know where to begin.

So I guess I did single the card out for critique because it has so many votes. I'm just a bit confused as to why people like it so much.

I've always loved these hard-counter styles of card design Blizzard has done, so my first card, Hungry Microsaur, aims to generalize the hard-counter style of card design to fit simply a common theme in prevalent 1 drops: 1 Attack.

A card with an effect such as this automatically provide a drastic tempo swing as it is on turn two, so the 1 Attack placed on this minion aims to balance that out. 

Submissions is gonna be pretty empty for the next couple week with all the new cards rolling out, especially at this unusually high rate that it's at right now :/

Quote from Livienna >>

Quote from ZardozSpeaks >>

To be fair, I should also say that Oncurvasaur is not at all the most OP card this week, nor is it the only card I find lacking decent flavor. Further down the same page, Fossilize strikes me as completely broken and a card like Tacosaurus... I don't even know where to begin.

So I guess I did single the card out for critique because it has so many votes. I'm just a bit confused as to why people like it so much.

Fair enough. I appreciate the lesson on conditional cards... I'm new to card creation, this is only my 4th WCDC, so I'm def still learning. Also... pretty sure Fossilize will be DQed. It was decided that Unearthed Raptor doesn't fit the requirement of a dino on the art, so I can't imagine fossils will. And yeah, we can agree on the taco. lmao.

For me, a "troll entry" is:

- A re-skin of a card that exist in the game with few (or no) changes

- A card from another game with no changes (except having a HS card-skin)

- A humorous entry that goes way to far (like remaking Genzo, the Shark to a card  named "Grenzo" with "Battlecry: Build a wall across the battlefield and MAGA".(someone actually made that!))

I'm glad my entry is doing at least a little better than it was, 4-5th or so on Page 1 for my first proper entry into this competition. Obviously would have liked to do better but hey. 

Do feel that thematically some entries could be stronger. Like sometimes people just design a card and then try to fit the weeks theme into it whereas I feel the weeks theme should actually inspire the mechanics of the card. Different strokes for different folks though, lots of good entries this week. 

Quote from DyingAtheist >>

I'm glad my entry is doing at least a little better than it was, 4-5th or so on Page 1 for my first proper entry into this competition. Obviously would have liked to do better but hey. 

Do feel that thematically some entries could be stronger. Like sometimes people just design a card and then try to fit the weeks theme into it whereas I feel the weeks theme should actually inspire the mechanics of the card. Different strokes for different folks though, lots of good entries this week. 

All hunter of course ;)

Edit: Changed Gharl the Beast stat from 9/7 to 7/6 because I thought 9/7 is way too broken

Final Poll is now up! Go ahead and vote for your winner! Or don't! It's entirely your decision!