But this last expansion feels like everyone is playing solitaire and the game has become less interactive and players are forced to just sit and watch the other go off with w/e combo they are playing.
Not a complain but seeing if others are experiencing the same?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Great art can never be created without great suffering.
Can we stop with this whole "Combos are non-interactive" bs? Do you even know what the term means in the context of a card game, because it isn't as flat as 'Can I completely stop my opponent's game plan and automatically win or not?' Throwing out memey reddit buzz words aren't going to make you anybody's waifu.
Can we stop with this whole "Combos are non-interactive" bs? Do you even know what the term means in the context of a card game, because it isn't as flat as 'Can I completely stop my opponent's game plan and automatically win or not?' Throwing out memey reddit buzz words aren't going to make you anybody's waifu.
1: the act of talking or doing things with other people Board games encourage interaction.
2: the action or influence of things on one another interaction of the heart and lungs
If I just sit there and watch as you play your cards because I can't do anything during your turn, I can't interact with your process. Like Shudderwock Shaman where you simply run board wipes, freezes, heals and play battlecries until you can play your combo. Exodia Mage, Paladin, etc. Now Druid has more combos, Paladin. It's like MtG modern, legacy, and cEDH - just seeing who can combo first. Except in MtG I can interact [Meaning, I can interrupt your play(s)]during your turn for the most part.
Next time, try to interact with the poster in a more positive way.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Great art can never be created without great suffering.
No, and to suggest that there's a lack of interaction in the game is to suggest that you could build your deck out of completely random cards and perform completely random actions over the course of the game and expect similar results every time. You can't do that, therefore there's interaction.
Can we stop with this whole "Combos are non-interactive" bs? Do you even know what the term means in the context of a card game, because it isn't as flat as 'Can I completely stop my opponent's game plan and automatically win or not?' Throwing out memey reddit buzz words aren't going to make you anybody's waifu.
1: the act of talking or doing things with other people Board games encourage interaction.
2: the action or influence of things on one another interaction of the heart and lungs
If I just sit there and watch as you play your cards because I can't do anything during your turn, I can't interact with your process. Like Shudderwock Shaman where you simply run board wipes, freezes, heals and play battlecries until you can play your combo. Exodia Mage, Paladin, etc. Now Druid has more combos, Paladin. It's like MtG modern, legacy, and cEDH - just seeing who can combo first. Except in MtG I can interact [Meaning, I can interrupt your play(s)]during your turn for the most part.
Next time, try to interact with the poster in a more positive way.
Again you don't seem to be getting it. I take it you've never played wide on a board to boost your minions' health over 15 to play around a Shuddwok player's Volcano. That's having your board interact with their board clear so that you have pressure still on the board into their overloaded turn, and not end up with no board. Not playing more than 3 minions if you get a read that a combo player plays MCT & has it in their hand. That's interacting with the possibility of a MCT play. Building your board tall, as opposed to wide, that's interacting with a combo Druid by both playing around plague and possible Gonk damage. I think you should look into that definition of interaction you linked me because everything I've described so far fits such a definition. I'm more than welcome to express more situations where players interact against combo decks if you wish.
Too many players seem to mistake a combo deck's fewer, but higher swing interactive plays as simply not being interactive since they don't need or want to interact every turn. For example, take the old Freeze Mage OTK deck. The mage didn't care about answering your board every single turn. That's not non-interaction, but actually conservation of resources and building up to respond with a higher swing turn (interacting with your bigger board later on). This often happened via FS, Nova + Doomsayer, Blizzard + Doomsayer, etc. Simply apply this to more relevant & modern combo decks. You also ignore the fact that sometimes a lack of a play that is made is not non-interaction, but is playing around that might have otherwise been detrimental to the combo player. For example, I play a few different OTK warlock decks. When going against slow priest decks I often very intentionally avoid playing Gul'Dan or N'Zoth onto an empty board (especially the former) in case they hit me with scream & I have not yet drawn all of my combo pieces. So in those cases I may simply have to just pass the turn. You see me pass/stall (apparently not interacting with you), but in reality I very much am interacting with the risk of something like Scream so that I don't get screwed over by your answer. You don't see that process.
Tl;dr: Whenever a player makes an action that changes an otherwise optimal turn, that is interacting (even if such a turn doesn't end in one player losing & the other winning). Also, avoiding making a bad turn & even possibly passing is still interacting with a potential play.
I'll interact with you more positively when you don't use sweeping generalizations of a whole playstyle by comparing it to solitaire when more interaction goes into it than you give credit for.
Tl;dr: Whenever a player makes an action that changes an otherwise optimal turn, that is interacting (even if such a turn doesn't end in one player losing & the other winning). Also, avoiding making a bad turn & even possibly passing is still interacting with a potential play.
I'll interact with you more positively when you don't use sweeping generalizations of a whole playstyle by comparing it to solitaire when more interaction goes into it than you give credit for.
This is the OP:
But this last expansion feels like everyone is playing solitaire and the game has become less interactive and players are forced to just sit and watch the other go off with w/e combo they are playing.
"Feels like" and "becoming less interactive" are hardly "sweeping generalizations".
Not being able to cast spells on the opponent's turn means I have to sit there and just watch. Unless I have a secret that activates outside my turn.
I disagree with what you understand as interaction. Having spells separated as "instant"/"flash" and "sorcery" means I have options to interact on my opponent's turn. Giving me an opportunity to stop a combo or a kill.
I'm not talking about going wide or planning for what you will be able to not do once your turn is over.
But the ability to INTERACT with you during your turn.
I get it well enough, thank you very much.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Great art can never be created without great suffering.
Can we stop with this whole "Combos are non-interactive" bs? Do you even know what the term means in the context of a card game, because it isn't as flat as 'Can I completely stop my opponent's game plan and automatically win or not?' Throwing out memey reddit buzz words aren't going to make you anybody's waifu.
i will put it simple because i like the way you comment in other threads, sometimes. People is complaining about how in this expansion there is not a plan B against combo decks (not even the ones that can get silence as Haildahspiderqueen Druid. The combo player gameplan is survive and hold their combo pieces in hand until he can do what he wants in one turn. Right? cool that is the plan on any combo deck in any card game except for the fact that in this moment you should not worry about your combo pieces being touched. There is not rat or something that let you take the combo pieces from the deck (or the hand) So you, the oponent has not option but hope that your oponent dont keep all his answers on hand...and that is imposible because right now the anti-board tools are far stronger than the aggresive tools in most combo decks. Only control decks or value decks find themself underpowered like spell hunter vs Odd pala/rogue or Zoo lock.
Hearthstone interaction: Type one looks like - Player plays a card, effects happen that change the state of their board or their hand or their deck. Type two looks like - Player plays a card, effects happen that change the state of enemies board, hand or deck. This is playing with yourself, the opponent can't do anything about this "actively" the only thing that can happen here is "Passive" effects such as traps or minions with death rattle/ enter field effects. Hearthstone is all about "passive" interaction or interacting with a state-based field.
MTG interaction: Type one looks like - Player 1 plays a card, effects happen that change the state of their board or their hand or their deck. At any time one of these things happen Player 2 can play a card to alter the effect of Player one's action as long as they have a card to do so. Type two looks like - Player plays a card, effects happen that change the state of enemies board, hand or deck. At any time one of these things happen Player 2 can play a card to alter the effect of Player one's action as long as they have a card to do so. This is playing with an opponent, the opponent can "actively" interact with what is happening in addition to "passive" effects that may be present.
Interaction is both an "active" and "passive" function in games. From what I can gather from posts like this is, there are some players within the Hearthstone community that would like to see a more "active" form of interaction within the game.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Cute, ineffective, but cute.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Not sure if I am missing something.
But this last expansion feels like everyone is playing solitaire and the game has become less interactive and players are forced to just sit and watch the other go off with w/e combo they are playing.
Not a complain but seeing if others are experiencing the same?
Great art can never be created without great suffering.
No. Just no.
Nope.
"There is no spoon"
Can we stop with this whole "Combos are non-interactive" bs? Do you even know what the term means in the context of a card game, because it isn't as flat as 'Can I completely stop my opponent's game plan and automatically win or not?' Throwing out memey reddit buzz words aren't going to make you anybody's waifu.
Do you know what interaction means?
Here:
interaction
nounKids Definition of interaction
1: the act of talking or doing things with other people Board games encourage interaction.
2: the action or influence of things on one another interaction of the heart and lungs
If I just sit there and watch as you play your cards because I can't do anything during your turn, I can't interact with your process. Like Shudderwock Shaman where you simply run board wipes, freezes, heals and play battlecries until you can play your combo. Exodia Mage, Paladin, etc. Now Druid has more combos, Paladin. It's like MtG modern, legacy, and cEDH - just seeing who can combo first. Except in MtG I can interact [Meaning, I can interrupt your play(s)]during your turn for the most part.
Next time, try to interact with the poster in a more positive way.
Great art can never be created without great suffering.
I get emoted just as much, if that's what you are asking.
"What have you got there,
PinocchioMalygos?"No, and to suggest that there's a lack of interaction in the game is to suggest that you could build your deck out of completely random cards and perform completely random actions over the course of the game and expect similar results every time. You can't do that, therefore there's interaction.
Again you don't seem to be getting it. I take it you've never played wide on a board to boost your minions' health over 15 to play around a Shuddwok player's Volcano. That's having your board interact with their board clear so that you have pressure still on the board into their overloaded turn, and not end up with no board. Not playing more than 3 minions if you get a read that a combo player plays MCT & has it in their hand. That's interacting with the possibility of a MCT play. Building your board tall, as opposed to wide, that's interacting with a combo Druid by both playing around plague and possible Gonk damage. I think you should look into that definition of interaction you linked me because everything I've described so far fits such a definition. I'm more than welcome to express more situations where players interact against combo decks if you wish.
Too many players seem to mistake a combo deck's fewer, but higher swing interactive plays as simply not being interactive since they don't need or want to interact every turn. For example, take the old Freeze Mage OTK deck. The mage didn't care about answering your board every single turn. That's not non-interaction, but actually conservation of resources and building up to respond with a higher swing turn (interacting with your bigger board later on). This often happened via FS, Nova + Doomsayer, Blizzard + Doomsayer, etc. Simply apply this to more relevant & modern combo decks. You also ignore the fact that sometimes a lack of a play that is made is not non-interaction, but is playing around that might have otherwise been detrimental to the combo player. For example, I play a few different OTK warlock decks. When going against slow priest decks I often very intentionally avoid playing Gul'Dan or N'Zoth onto an empty board (especially the former) in case they hit me with scream & I have not yet drawn all of my combo pieces. So in those cases I may simply have to just pass the turn. You see me pass/stall (apparently not interacting with you), but in reality I very much am interacting with the risk of something like Scream so that I don't get screwed over by your answer. You don't see that process.
Tl;dr: Whenever a player makes an action that changes an otherwise optimal turn, that is interacting (even if such a turn doesn't end in one player losing & the other winning). Also, avoiding making a bad turn & even possibly passing is still interacting with a potential play.
I'll interact with you more positively when you don't use sweeping generalizations of a whole playstyle by comparing it to solitaire when more interaction goes into it than you give credit for.
This is the OP:
"Feels like" and "becoming less interactive" are hardly "sweeping generalizations".
Not being able to cast spells on the opponent's turn means I have to sit there and just watch. Unless I have a secret that activates outside my turn.
I disagree with what you understand as interaction. Having spells separated as "instant"/"flash" and "sorcery" means I have options to interact on my opponent's turn. Giving me an opportunity to stop a combo or a kill.
I'm not talking about going wide or planning for what you will be able to not do once your turn is over.
But the ability to INTERACT with you during your turn.
I get it well enough, thank you very much.
Great art can never be created without great suffering.
There’s been much worse times than now in the lifetime of the game. Up until Dirty Rat, combo breakers didn’t exist.
Dibbity don't touch that!
There were no need for combo breakers because the combos weren't very powerful back then.
play aggro, interact with opponents face, everybody goes home jolly happy
As these rules don't apply overall in Hearthstone, you can either quit this and play other games you like more or get used to it and keep playing.
i will put it simple because i like the way you comment in other threads, sometimes. People is complaining about how in this expansion there is not a plan B against combo decks (not even the ones that can get silence as Haildahspiderqueen Druid. The combo player gameplan is survive and hold their combo pieces in hand until he can do what he wants in one turn. Right? cool that is the plan on any combo deck in any card game except for the fact that in this moment you should not worry about your combo pieces being touched. There is not rat or something that let you take the combo pieces from the deck (or the hand) So you, the oponent has not option but hope that your oponent dont keep all his answers on hand...and that is imposible because right now the anti-board tools are far stronger than the aggresive tools in most combo decks. Only control decks or value decks find themself underpowered like spell hunter vs Odd pala/rogue or Zoo lock.
Hearthstone interaction:
Type one looks like - Player plays a card, effects happen that change the state of their board or their hand or their deck.
Type two looks like - Player plays a card, effects happen that change the state of enemies board, hand or deck.
This is playing with yourself, the opponent can't do anything about this "actively" the only thing that can happen here is "Passive" effects such as traps or minions with death rattle/ enter field effects.
Hearthstone is all about "passive" interaction or interacting with a state-based field.
MTG interaction:
Type one looks like - Player 1 plays a card, effects happen that change the state of their board or their hand or their deck. At any time one of these things happen Player 2 can play a card to alter the effect of Player one's action as long as they have a card to do so.
Type two looks like - Player plays a card, effects happen that change the state of enemies board, hand or deck. At any time one of these things happen Player 2 can play a card to alter the effect of Player one's action as long as they have a card to do so.
This is playing with an opponent, the opponent can "actively" interact with what is happening in addition to "passive" effects that may be present.
Interaction is both an "active" and "passive" function in games. From what I can gather from posts like this is, there are some players within the Hearthstone community that would like to see a more "active" form of interaction within the game.
Cute, ineffective, but cute.