I think the animation does a good job of explaining how it works. It basically just knocks one minion into the other, "forcing" them to attack each other.
I was about to stop reading when I read this, which was what I was about to write
It's simple. A 0 Attack Minion could not attack because their was never a mechanic available that Forced it to attack, and it was counter intuitive to allow a 0 Attack Minion to attack previously. Now we have Supercollider.
It would be just as counter intuitive if Supercollider didn't work on 0 Attack minions because it would not be doing what the text says.
By your Logic if you hit a minion that is Exhausted(Already Attacked) losing it's ability to attack temporarily then Supercollider shouldn't work on it. So basically the same way a Minion that is sleeping can be forced to attack is no different than a 0 Attack minion being forced to attack.
Ofcourse it should. Read what the card says. There is literally no logic for it not to work.
The logic is; a 0 attack minion should NOT be able to attack no matter what.
What if you give a 0 Attack minion some Attack points? It could attack then, right? If a 0 Attack minion can attack if it has a value, forcing it to attack when it has 0 Attack is the same base logic. You're giving it the ability to attack, even though it has no Attack points.
The logic stands.
No, not really, it's not the same logic because as you said you give it attack value by increasing its attack. 1+ is not 0.
If we follow your logic, why can't we choose to attack with our 0 attack minions ? (for example needing board space, purposely killing your 0 attack minions to make room would make sense). However that's not possible because minions with no attack value shouldn't be able to attack. Charge does not override the ''can't attack text'' I don't see why Supercollider should overwrite the attack rule from 0 attack minions. Supercollider doesn't add any attack value.
Because it's like saying that because Betrayal can force enemy minions to damage each other that we should be able to choose to damage friendly characters with minion and Hero attacks. Supercollider and Betrayal both force an enemy minion to attack/deal damage which is why the logic stands. Charge doesn't override the "can't attack" text because Charge is a very specific application concerning rules of engagement concerning attacking. If giving something Charge that states clearly that it can't attack, the Charge is wasted completely. This isn't really a comparable logic, considering 0 Attack minions CAN attack. The only reason they can't normally attack is because they lack the offensive value required. Supercollider grants the offensive value in its own way. The minion having 0 Attack is irrelevant because 0 Attack minions being forced to attack versus 0 Attack minions being able to attack... two different situations. Being forced is different from having capabilities willed to you at your discretion.
If you read carefully the text of betrayal and supercollider you'll see that it's different.
Ofcourse it should. Read what the card says. There is literally no logic for it not to work.
The logic is; a 0 attack minion should NOT be able to attack no matter what.
What if you give a 0 Attack minion some Attack points? It could attack then, right? If a 0 Attack minion can attack if it has a value, forcing it to attack when it has 0 Attack is the same base logic. You're giving it the ability to attack, even though it has no Attack points.
The logic stands.
No, not really, it's not the same logic because as you said you give it attack value by increasing its attack. 1+ is not 0.
If we follow your logic, why can't we choose to attack with our 0 attack minions ? (for example needing board space, purposely killing your 0 attack minions to make room would make sense). However that's not possible because minions with no attack value shouldn't be able to attack. Charge does not override the ''can't attack text'' I don't see why Supercollider should overwrite the attack rule from 0 attack minions. Supercollider doesn't add any attack value.
Because it's like saying that because Betrayal can force enemy minions to damage each other that we should be able to choose to damage friendly characters with minion and Hero attacks. Supercollider and Betrayal both force an enemy minion to attack/deal damage which is why the logic stands. Charge doesn't override the "can't attack" text because Charge is a very specific application concerning rules of engagement concerning attacking. If giving something Charge that states clearly that it can't attack, the Charge is wasted completely. This isn't really a comparable logic, considering 0 Attack minions CAN attack. The only reason they can't normally attack is because they lack the offensive value required. Supercollider grants the offensive value in its own way. The minion having 0 Attack is irrelevant because 0 Attack minions being forced to attack versus 0 Attack minions being able to attack... two different situations. Being forced is different from having capabilities willed to you at your discretion.
If you read carefully the text of betrayal and supercollider you'll see that it's different.
What do you care about reading when it's clear you've ignored reading and understanding the part about Supercollider that makes this thread nonsense?
Ofcourse it should. Read what the card says. There is literally no logic for it not to work.
The logic is; a 0 attack minion should NOT be able to attack no matter what.
What if you give a 0 Attack minion some Attack points? It could attack then, right? If a 0 Attack minion can attack if it has a value, forcing it to attack when it has 0 Attack is the same base logic. You're giving it the ability to attack, even though it has no Attack points.
The logic stands.
No, not really, it's not the same logic because as you said you give it attack value by increasing its attack. 1+ is not 0.
If we follow your logic, why can't we choose to attack with our 0 attack minions ? (for example needing board space, purposely killing your 0 attack minions to make room would make sense). However that's not possible because minions with no attack value shouldn't be able to attack. Charge does not override the ''can't attack text'' I don't see why Supercollider should overwrite the attack rule from 0 attack minions. Supercollider doesn't add any attack value.
Because it's like saying that because Betrayal can force enemy minions to damage each other that we should be able to choose to damage friendly characters with minion and Hero attacks. Supercollider and Betrayal both force an enemy minion to attack/deal damage which is why the logic stands. Charge doesn't override the "can't attack" text because Charge is a very specific application concerning rules of engagement concerning attacking. If giving something Charge that states clearly that it can't attack, the Charge is wasted completely. This isn't really a comparable logic, considering 0 Attack minions CAN attack. The only reason they can't normally attack is because they lack the offensive value required. Supercollider grants the offensive value in its own way. The minion having 0 Attack is irrelevant because 0 Attack minions being forced to attack versus 0 Attack minions being able to attack... two different situations. Being forced is different from having capabilities willed to you at your discretion.
If you read carefully the text of betrayal and supercollider you'll see that it's different.
What do you care about reading when it's clear you've ignored reading and understanding the part about Supercollider that makes this thread nonsense?
I know the game mechanics very well, son. I'm very aware of the logic behind supercollider, it doesn't change the fact that a 0 attack minion actually ''attacking'' is dumb IMO, especially since you can't attack with your 0/3 eggs on your own, if you could that'd be a different story.
Also there's many inconsistencies in Hearthstone so you can't say that I'm wrong just because I made this thread, it's one of those mechanics that could very well be changed in the future.
Card games do not follow intuitive logic systems. Thus arguments over the meaning of 'force' mean absolutely nothing. "stealth" is defined as: "Can't be attacked or targeted until it attacks." yet the owner can still target it. Frozen creatures can still perform abilities like throwing knives, which does not make sense.
What matters in card games are Consistency and Balance. The mechanic must logically work the same time each time. If it's based on an old mechanic, it must follow the rules of the old mechanic. If it's a new mechanic, it can do whatever the hey it wants so long as it keeps doing the same thing. Beyond that, the mechanic must make sense from a Balance perspective. Not so much if it's 'fair' (if you've noticed, the entire point to mechanics is to be Unfair to your opponent) but whether it's overpowered.
Supercollider uses the 'force' mechanic. The idea of what 0 attack minions can do when you are controling it really doesn't matter since this is a separate mechanic from "player attack". Mechanics CAN break the rules of other different mechanics. Deathrattles are supposed to go off by killing the minion. Yet 'Trigger deathrattle' says "F U" and ignores this rule. Because it's consistent and doesn't break balance, we now have minions who trigger deathrattles without dying. So long as the new mechanic works the same way each time, it can break the rules of other mechanics. Thus all that matters is what mechanics the card uses and whether it already exists in game.
Part of Supercollider's text IS an old mechanic, shared by Betrayal; force. However, the following text differs in what the 'force' does: Betrayal 'deals' damage while Supercollider actually attacks. The '...to attack' is new and, thus, so long as the mechanics of 'force' are upheld, the Collider can do whatever it wants.
As far as Force mechanics, Betrayal IS allowed to target 0 attack minions. The minions WILL activate and 'deal damage' to their neighbors (0, of course). This means Supercollider is allowed to 'affect' 0 attack minions as well. Since '...to attack' is new, Supercollider is fully allowed to not work (you can target 0 attack minions, but they won't do anything) or work (target 0 attack minions and Attack for 0 damage).
As such, "force to attack" must be allowed to be targeted by 0 attack minions since Betrayal set the precedent. whether it actually attacks is 100% up to the designers, so long as they maintain their choice afterwards.
As such, Supercollider is fully allowed to let a 0 attack minion whack against a 7/7. It's also allowed to NOT do this. The question isn't whether it should be allowed to. The question IS whether it's good for it to work that way from a Balance perspective with the onus on the "not balance" requiring the burden of proof.
To put it another way, unless Blizzard simply didn't want Supercollider to work this way, or someone comes up why letting it work this way is horrible for the meta, Supercollider is free to work this way, no matter how 'odd' it looks.
Characters with no attack value can't attack. By that logic you should be allowed to attack with aluneth
I was about to stop reading when I read this, which was what I was about to write
It's simple. A 0 Attack Minion could not attack because their was never a mechanic available that Forced it to attack, and it was counter intuitive to allow a 0 Attack Minion to attack previously. Now we have Supercollider.
It would be just as counter intuitive if Supercollider didn't work on 0 Attack minions because it would not be doing what the text says.
By your Logic if you hit a minion that is Exhausted(Already Attacked) losing it's ability to attack temporarily then Supercollider shouldn't work on it. So basically the same way a Minion that is sleeping can be forced to attack is no different than a 0 Attack minion being forced to attack.
If you read carefully the text of betrayal and supercollider you'll see that it's different.
What do you care about reading when it's clear you've ignored reading and understanding the part about Supercollider that makes this thread nonsense?
Come visit my Card Emporium. Strange things, you will find inside...
Come take the test, if you're daring. Feel free to show me your results in a message.
I know the game mechanics very well, son. I'm very aware of the logic behind supercollider, it doesn't change the fact that a 0 attack minion actually ''attacking'' is dumb IMO, especially since you can't attack with your 0/3 eggs on your own, if you could that'd be a different story.
Also there's many inconsistencies in Hearthstone so you can't say that I'm wrong just because I made this thread, it's one of those mechanics that could very well be changed in the future.
Why is it ok for the weapon to work on a minion that can't attack, but not on a 0 attack minion?
Card games do not follow intuitive logic systems. Thus arguments over the meaning of 'force' mean absolutely nothing. "stealth" is defined as: "Can't be attacked or targeted until it attacks." yet the owner can still target it. Frozen creatures can still perform abilities like throwing knives, which does not make sense.
What matters in card games are Consistency and Balance. The mechanic must logically work the same time each time. If it's based on an old mechanic, it must follow the rules of the old mechanic. If it's a new mechanic, it can do whatever the hey it wants so long as it keeps doing the same thing. Beyond that, the mechanic must make sense from a Balance perspective. Not so much if it's 'fair' (if you've noticed, the entire point to mechanics is to be Unfair to your opponent) but whether it's overpowered.
Supercollider uses the 'force' mechanic. The idea of what 0 attack minions can do when you are controling it really doesn't matter since this is a separate mechanic from "player attack". Mechanics CAN break the rules of other different mechanics. Deathrattles are supposed to go off by killing the minion. Yet 'Trigger deathrattle' says "F U" and ignores this rule. Because it's consistent and doesn't break balance, we now have minions who trigger deathrattles without dying. So long as the new mechanic works the same way each time, it can break the rules of other mechanics. Thus all that matters is what mechanics the card uses and whether it already exists in game.
Part of Supercollider's text IS an old mechanic, shared by Betrayal; force. However, the following text differs in what the 'force' does: Betrayal 'deals' damage while Supercollider actually attacks. The '...to attack' is new and, thus, so long as the mechanics of 'force' are upheld, the Collider can do whatever it wants.
As far as Force mechanics, Betrayal IS allowed to target 0 attack minions. The minions WILL activate and 'deal damage' to their neighbors (0, of course). This means Supercollider is allowed to 'affect' 0 attack minions as well. Since '...to attack' is new, Supercollider is fully allowed to not work (you can target 0 attack minions, but they won't do anything) or work (target 0 attack minions and Attack for 0 damage).
As such, "force to attack" must be allowed to be targeted by 0 attack minions since Betrayal set the precedent. whether it actually attacks is 100% up to the designers, so long as they maintain their choice afterwards.
As such, Supercollider is fully allowed to let a 0 attack minion whack against a 7/7. It's also allowed to NOT do this. The question isn't whether it should be allowed to. The question IS whether it's good for it to work that way from a Balance perspective with the onus on the "not balance" requiring the burden of proof.
To put it another way, unless Blizzard simply didn't want Supercollider to work this way, or someone comes up why letting it work this way is horrible for the meta, Supercollider is free to work this way, no matter how 'odd' it looks.
One does not simply walk into Mordor,
unless they want to be the best they can be.
if you have some fucking brain you know it shouldnt work, how should it attack with 0 attack? come on man
It's a sad day for humanity when it takes 2+ forum pages to debate the practical meaning of the word force.
The card works as it should.
I voted "Yes", but I also do think that 0 attack minions should be able to attack.
Imho that's the logic problem and not this way round.