I've always appreciated the option to have a more diverse gameplay experience, especially in card games where ladder decks can become very "cookie-cutter-esc", very fast. This mechanic should help out quite a bit when it comes to diversifying plays on a turn to turn basis.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If evolution is outlawed, only outlaws will evolve.
I have a feeling that miracle Rogue will abuse this mechanic very well to cycle their entire decks for cards they need, like the current 1-mana draw 4 cards…
It's basically clone of Cycling from MTG. You'll play it if the actual card will be good or if there will be good cards that trigger when you trade.
Think about it - You have a card that you don't need in particular part of the game. Instead of holding it in your hand or burning it to do something unnecessary you'll be able to trade it for draw. One mana for an option to trade not needed card in your hand for something potentially very important like removal to save yourself from threats or burn/pump spell to finish the game is pretty huge.
Tradeable cards for sure will find place in meta decks as this kind of cards with option to dig further into your deck. And again, if we get some good cards interacting with trades it may even end as meta deck on its own.
Yeah, after Scry, they copied another mechanic... So original.
That said it's an excellent keyword for tech cards, that mostly get useless in certain matchups... Here at least you get a really cheap draw.
i think the keyword is fine, but it does not thin your deck like some people here claim. It doesn’t change the number of cards in your deck. On the other hand it allows you to play a deck with less cards (by only using the tradeable cards to trade
I thin the armour gain is pretty sweet, particularly if they move towards a slower meta. Works well with shield slam as a flexible removal combo, 3 mana heal 8 isn't shabby at all and if you don't need it at that moment, you can trade it for a different card. If control warrior is a thing then I imagine this will be an auto include.
Maybe you are right but I dont have high hopes for the card. Compared to Iron Hide its +3 armor for +2 mana and that card havent seen much play. Compared to Shield Block its +3 armor and -1 card which seems a bad deal. The tradeable flexibility is nice, but the baseline seems weak compared to other tradeable cards.
Turn 5 Druid fill board with the 2/2. You do not have Rancor or Bladestorm in hand. If you have Shieldblock , you may cycle to search for these two spell but you do not have enough mana to play it. Your 5 armor is useless because the Druid will buff these 2/2 next turn and have a very strong position . But if you have this card instead, you can cycle for 1 then play Rancor.
Another example, you have 4 health and the Hunter can deal 10 next turn. If you have Shieldblock you're dead , your draw is useless. But with this card, you can live for another turn.
So I do not say that this card is better than Shieldblock. But there are a lot of situations this card is better than Shieldblock .
These are marginal examples. Also if you have 4 health against a hunter there is a good chance that your draw from Shield block will be playable so the draw isnt useless.
The only way I can see this card is useful if the warrior will really need armor stacking so you want to run both this, Shield block and every possible armor gain.
1 mana draw 1, and doesn't accelerate fatigue? where in the world is it bad? and stop boohooing about aggro decks, we don't even know if aggro will be meta after expansion
There is absolutely no chance you won't see many of Trade cards in the meta, unless they are extremely bad. Like, the Trade mechanic is so strong that you could even consider the 8 Armor warrior card in an actual deck, depending on the meta.
The big plus of these cards is that you draw another card, so the "I mulliganed that card and now I drew it again" thing won't happen (unless, of course, you draw the 2nd copy, but then you pay 1 mana and continue).
It's also not necesssarily right to compare the keyword to drawing in a card text because the keyword gives you options, which is extremely strong in any card game. It's more like a Choose One where one option costs 1 mana.
I just really hope that one of the legendaries doesn't do some crazy stuff like "Your Tradeable abilities cost 1 less" because that would lead to a very fast nerf after release.
These cards are being over rated by player who are used to the old metas where card draw was rare. The current examples will see play if they are good enough without being tradable and won't otherwise. Now, tradable on expensive cards that cost 6+ might make a big difference. You could put higher cost cards in you deck without worrying about them clogging up your hand. Demon hunter might also love tradable on outcast cards.
I thin the armour gain is pretty sweet, particularly if they move towards a slower meta. Works well with shield slam as a flexible removal combo, 3 mana heal 8 isn't shabby at all and if you don't need it at that moment, you can trade it for a different card. If control warrior is a thing then I imagine this will be an auto include.
Maybe you are right but I dont have high hopes for the card. Compared to Iron Hide its +3 armor for +2 mana and that card havent seen much play. Compared to Shield Block its +3 armor and -1 card which seems a bad deal. The tradeable flexibility is nice, but the baseline seems weak compared to other tradeable cards.
Particularly as we haven't seen the full set, I think making much of a declaration either way at this point is fairly premature. I hear what you're saying but comparing cards from completely different metas is comparing apples and oranges really. Some cards that weren't once great have become game breaking due to receiving support. Just like really good cards have been made redundant in different metas.
If they release a card that works with armour then this conversation changes, so I'm not saying it will be great, I'm not saying it won't be. At the moment it seems a fairly flexible little card which, with little support, could be really good and the reason I used it as an example is just to highlight the flexibility of the mechanic itself. Need some armour gain for either life gain or to combo with something like shield slam? Great, use it. Don't need any of those things? Send it back and get a new card for one mana. It's an interesting mechanic and will reward good decision making.
I've always appreciated the option to have a more diverse gameplay experience, especially in card games where ladder decks can become very "cookie-cutter-esc", very fast. This mechanic should help out quite a bit when it comes to diversifying plays on a turn to turn basis.
There is absolutely no chance you won't see many of Trade cards in the meta, unless they are extremely bad. Like, the Trade mechanic is so strong that you could even consider the 8 Armor warrior card in an actual deck, depending on the meta.
The big plus of these cards is that you draw another card, so the "I mulliganed that card and now I drew it again" thing won't happen (unless, of course, you draw the 2nd copy, but then you pay 1 mana and continue).
It's also not necesssarily right to compare the keyword to drawing in a card text because the keyword gives you options, which is extremely strong in any card game. It's more like a Choose One where one option costs 1 mana.
I just really hope that one of the legendaries doesn't do some crazy stuff like "Your Tradeable abilities cost 1 less" because that would lead to a very fast nerf after release.
I'm a huge fan of the Choose One mechanic. Could be pretty obvious to some, but yeah, they are kinda similar, which is great!
I'm with those that think it's only going to be kind of "meh". I'm glad they're experimenting with it, but I think it'll only be useful for tech cards or perhaps high cost cards. The problem being, that we're unlikely to see really good cards printed with the effect. And if that's the case, you'll think to yourself when building a deck, "Do I really need this flexibility when instead I could just include a better card." There will also be a high skill ceiling to using it to its full potential. May have more popularity at high legend ranks, but lower ranks will probably just skip it and stick with the agro focus.
Edit: I guess my TLDR, is why have a card in your deck that you don't want?
We dont know yet if the keyword is going to have any support as in "whenever you "trade" a card gain x" but even without support its allready pretty decent, for example the destroy a weapon beast, you have included it in your deck to get rid of doomhammer, but you play against priest? No problem, just shuffle it back in and get something that might be useful now.
I'm with those that think it's only going to be kind of "meh". I'm glad they're experimenting with it, but I think it'll only be useful for tech cards or perhaps high cost cards. The problem being, that we're unlikely to see really good cards printed with the effect. And if that's the case, you'll think to yourself when building a deck, "Do I really need this flexibility when instead I could just include a better card." There will also be a high skill ceiling to using it to its full potential. May have more popularity at high legend ranks, but lower ranks will probably just skip it and stick with the agro focus.
Edit: I guess my TLDR, is why have a card in your deck that you don't want?
You're asking the wrong question. Obviously I don't put cards in the deck that I don't want to play, however I do put cards in the deck that I only need in certain matchups, at least in a control deck.
Let's say for example that face decks infest the meta: in my deck I will put cards that heal me. If I can cycle them, even at 1 mana, I will cycle them when my opponent plays control.
The same goes for every tech card. But not only that, if I play control I must have AOE, if my opponent is OTK I don't need aoe so I cycle them.
Or I can cycle if I need solutions to a specific board or threat, not having answers in hand, or more generally to look for a specific card that can solve the game by itself.
Or maybe it allows me to play tech cards that otherwise I could not play, cards that move a lot in some MUs but against others are useless. In that case transforming the dead draw in a consumed mana seems to me positive.
And that's without talking about discovered cards.
Obviously this does not mean that the mechanics is OP. In theory the mechanic seems interesting, the strength, as always, will depend on how much Blizzard intends to charge for it.
I'm with those that think it's only going to be kind of "meh". I'm glad they're experimenting with it, but I think it'll only be useful for tech cards or perhaps high cost cards. The problem being, that we're unlikely to see really good cards printed with the effect. And if that's the case, you'll think to yourself when building a deck, "Do I really need this flexibility when instead I could just include a better card." There will also be a high skill ceiling to using it to its full potential. May have more popularity at high legend ranks, but lower ranks will probably just skip it and stick with the agro focus.
Edit: I guess my TLDR, is why have a card in your deck that you don't want?
You're asking the wrong question. Obviously I don't put cards in the deck that I don't want to play, however I do put cards in the deck that I only need in certain matchups, at least in a control deck.
Let's say for example that face decks infest the meta: in my deck I will put cards that heal me. If I can cycle them, even at 1 mana, I will cycle them when my opponent plays control.
The same goes for every tech card. But not only that, if I play control I must have AOE, if my opponent is OTK I don't need aoe so I cycle them.
Or I can cycle if I need solutions to a specific board or threat, not having answers in hand, or more generally to look for a specific card that can solve the game by itself.
Or maybe it allows me to play tech cards that otherwise I could not play, cards that move a lot in some MUs but against others are useless. In that case transforming the dead draw in a consumed mana seems to me positive.
And that's without talking about discovered cards.
Obviously this does not mean that the mechanics is OP. In theory the mechanic seems interesting, the strength, as always, will depend on how much Blizzard intends to charge for it.
Well yeah, it would be great if you could trade out for stuff you need. At least as of now, however, Hearthstone decks aren't built that way. They're built for matchups and mana curves. Using your example of control vs OTK, going to your deck for more draw is just going to pull more of what you already didn't need. You've built the deck with heals, AOE and drawing is just going to get you more of what you don't need. It's just a bad matchup and your deck doesn't have the right answers. Another example is rush warrior vs no minion mage. For rush warrior, trading cards with your deck for more draw is just going to give you more rush minions. Again, I see the potential for tech cards, especially anti-weapon cards, but that's about the only use I think it will get.
Edit: Another way to put it. Imagine that every current card in the game had the tradeable mechanic on it. However, as a tradeoff every one of those cards now cost one more mana (in addition to the one mana cost of the trade). Would a 5 mana Hysteria that was tradeable make the cut?
I'm with those that think it's only going to be kind of "meh". I'm glad they're experimenting with it, but I think it'll only be useful for tech cards or perhaps high cost cards. The problem being, that we're unlikely to see really good cards printed with the effect. And if that's the case, you'll think to yourself when building a deck, "Do I really need this flexibility when instead I could just include a better card." There will also be a high skill ceiling to using it to its full potential. May have more popularity at high legend ranks, but lower ranks will probably just skip it and stick with the agro focus.
Edit: I guess my TLDR, is why have a card in your deck that you don't want?
You're asking the wrong question. Obviously I don't put cards in the deck that I don't want to play, however I do put cards in the deck that I only need in certain matchups, at least in a control deck.
Let's say for example that face decks infest the meta: in my deck I will put cards that heal me. If I can cycle them, even at 1 mana, I will cycle them when my opponent plays control.
The same goes for every tech card. But not only that, if I play control I must have AOE, if my opponent is OTK I don't need aoe so I cycle them.
Or I can cycle if I need solutions to a specific board or threat, not having answers in hand, or more generally to look for a specific card that can solve the game by itself.
Or maybe it allows me to play tech cards that otherwise I could not play, cards that move a lot in some MUs but against others are useless. In that case transforming the dead draw in a consumed mana seems to me positive.
And that's without talking about discovered cards.
Obviously this does not mean that the mechanics is OP. In theory the mechanic seems interesting, the strength, as always, will depend on how much Blizzard intends to charge for it.
Well yeah, it would be great if you could trade out for stuff you need. At least as of now, however, Hearthstone decks aren't built that way. They're built for matchups and mana curves. Using your example of control vs OTK, going to your deck for more draw is just going to pull more of what you already didn't need. You've built the deck with heals, AOE and drawing is just going to get you more of what you don't need. It's just a bad matchup and your deck doesn't have the right answers. Another example is rush warrior vs no minion mage. For rush warrior, trading cards with your deck for more draw is just going to give you more rush minions. Again, I see the potential for tech cards, especially anti-weapon cards, but that's about the only use I think it will get.
Edit: Another way to put it. Imagine that every current card in the game had the tradeable mechanic on it. However, as a tradeoff every one of those cards now cost one more mana (in addition to the one mana cost of the trade). Would a 5 mana Hysteria that was tradeable make the cut?
True. People are acting as if Tradeable instantly gives you the card that you want, but that's certainly not the reality.
You are more likely to get another useless card, and you pay 1 Mana for that.
Like the snake card, for example. It's actually better to play it right away when available against Priest, for example, where the class has no weapon, instead of shuffling it into the deck, so that you aren't punished as hard as in later turns when there are more Mana (since you won't be able to play it regardless of whether or not you shuffle it into the deck, and Priest matches basically end up in fatigue), and if the opponent potentially has a weapon, you don't want to shuffle the card into the deck.
Most (all?) of the tradeable cards we've seen are good against aggro.
You're trading these cards because you want something bigger that's higher impact in slower match ups, not looking for answers in fast tempo/aggro match ups.
I think the keyword does have a lot of potential, but I fear that it'll be a letdown. I feel like this should be put on expensive minions or something so that they don't clog up your hand and improve your consistency. However, I fear that the keyword will be used as "We print a mediocre card that would never see play and then put tradable on it" instead of making actual good tradable cards. 3 mana 3/3 rush exists and never saw play. 1 mana gain 5 armour exists and never saw play. I doubt the small upside of tradable would make the cards worth running. Important to note with cards like Sigil Runner is that they do NOT shuffle back into your deck, meaning that they thin your deck, while tradable cards don't.
I'm with those that think it's only going to be kind of "meh". I'm glad they're experimenting with it, but I think it'll only be useful for tech cards or perhaps high cost cards. The problem being, that we're unlikely to see really good cards printed with the effect. And if that's the case, you'll think to yourself when building a deck, "Do I really need this flexibility when instead I could just include a better card." There will also be a high skill ceiling to using it to its full potential. May have more popularity at high legend ranks, but lower ranks will probably just skip it and stick with the agro focus.
Edit: I guess my TLDR, is why have a card in your deck that you don't want?
You're asking the wrong question. Obviously I don't put cards in the deck that I don't want to play, however I do put cards in the deck that I only need in certain matchups, at least in a control deck.
Let's say for example that face decks infest the meta: in my deck I will put cards that heal me. If I can cycle them, even at 1 mana, I will cycle them when my opponent plays control.
The same goes for every tech card. But not only that, if I play control I must have AOE, if my opponent is OTK I don't need aoe so I cycle them.
Or I can cycle if I need solutions to a specific board or threat, not having answers in hand, or more generally to look for a specific card that can solve the game by itself.
Or maybe it allows me to play tech cards that otherwise I could not play, cards that move a lot in some MUs but against others are useless. In that case transforming the dead draw in a consumed mana seems to me positive.
And that's without talking about discovered cards.
Obviously this does not mean that the mechanics is OP. In theory the mechanic seems interesting, the strength, as always, will depend on how much Blizzard intends to charge for it.
Well yeah, it would be great if you could trade out for stuff you need. At least as of now, however, Hearthstone decks aren't built that way. They're built for matchups and mana curves. Using your example of control vs OTK, going to your deck for more draw is just going to pull more of what you already didn't need. You've built the deck with heals, AOE and drawing is just going to get you more of what you don't need. It's just a bad matchup and your deck doesn't have the right answers. Another example is rush warrior vs no minion mage. For rush warrior, trading cards with your deck for more draw is just going to give you more rush minions. Again, I see the potential for tech cards, especially anti-weapon cards, but that's about the only use I think it will get.
Edit: Another way to put it. Imagine that every current card in the game had the tradeable mechanic on it. However, as a tradeoff every one of those cards now cost one more mana (in addition to the one mana cost of the trade). Would a 5 mana Hysteria that was tradeable make the cut?
Not every deck is a curvestone deck. Tempo decks will probably not gain much from the new keyword, but control decks will love it. In the control vs OTK matchup you can use the tradeable cards to get your disruption like Dirty rat or Mutanus or to get another card draw to find what you need.
And tradeable cards are not overcosted. The viper has premium stats for the cost and the mage aoe has the same cost as Hellfire.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I've always appreciated the option to have a more diverse gameplay experience, especially in card games where ladder decks can become very "cookie-cutter-esc", very fast. This mechanic should help out quite a bit when it comes to diversifying plays on a turn to turn basis.
If evolution is outlawed, only outlaws will evolve.
I have a feeling that miracle Rogue will abuse this mechanic very well to cycle their entire decks for cards they need, like the current 1-mana draw 4 cards…
Yeah, after Scry, they copied another mechanic... So original.
That said it's an excellent keyword for tech cards, that mostly get useless in certain matchups... Here at least you get a really cheap draw.
i think the keyword is fine, but it does not thin your deck like some people here claim. It doesn’t change the number of cards in your deck. On the other hand it allows you to play a deck with less cards (by only using the tradeable cards to trade
I disagree with OP. It's actually extremely strong at best, average at worst.
These are marginal examples. Also if you have 4 health against a hunter there is a good chance that your draw from Shield block will be playable so the draw isnt useless.
The only way I can see this card is useful if the warrior will really need armor stacking so you want to run both this, Shield block and every possible armor gain.
1 mana draw 1, and doesn't accelerate fatigue? where in the world is it bad? and stop boohooing about aggro decks, we don't even know if aggro will be meta after expansion
There is absolutely no chance you won't see many of Trade cards in the meta, unless they are extremely bad. Like, the Trade mechanic is so strong that you could even consider the 8 Armor warrior card in an actual deck, depending on the meta.
The big plus of these cards is that you draw another card, so the "I mulliganed that card and now I drew it again" thing won't happen (unless, of course, you draw the 2nd copy, but then you pay 1 mana and continue).
It's also not necesssarily right to compare the keyword to drawing in a card text because the keyword gives you options, which is extremely strong in any card game. It's more like a Choose One where one option costs 1 mana.
I just really hope that one of the legendaries doesn't do some crazy stuff like "Your Tradeable abilities cost 1 less" because that would lead to a very fast nerf after release.
These cards are being over rated by player who are used to the old metas where card draw was rare. The current examples will see play if they are good enough without being tradable and won't otherwise. Now, tradable on expensive cards that cost 6+ might make a big difference. You could put higher cost cards in you deck without worrying about them clogging up your hand. Demon hunter might also love tradable on outcast cards.
Particularly as we haven't seen the full set, I think making much of a declaration either way at this point is fairly premature. I hear what you're saying but comparing cards from completely different metas is comparing apples and oranges really. Some cards that weren't once great have become game breaking due to receiving support. Just like really good cards have been made redundant in different metas.
If they release a card that works with armour then this conversation changes, so I'm not saying it will be great, I'm not saying it won't be. At the moment it seems a fairly flexible little card which, with little support, could be really good and the reason I used it as an example is just to highlight the flexibility of the mechanic itself. Need some armour gain for either life gain or to combo with something like shield slam? Great, use it. Don't need any of those things? Send it back and get a new card for one mana. It's an interesting mechanic and will reward good decision making.
New mechanic is trash, just like this stupid game I play almost every day! >:-(
Just kidding, I f..king love it! :D
Totally agree. It's awesome! :)
Yep!
I'm a huge fan of the Choose One mechanic. Could be pretty obvious to some, but yeah, they are kinda similar, which is great!
I'm with those that think it's only going to be kind of "meh". I'm glad they're experimenting with it, but I think it'll only be useful for tech cards or perhaps high cost cards. The problem being, that we're unlikely to see really good cards printed with the effect. And if that's the case, you'll think to yourself when building a deck, "Do I really need this flexibility when instead I could just include a better card." There will also be a high skill ceiling to using it to its full potential. May have more popularity at high legend ranks, but lower ranks will probably just skip it and stick with the agro focus.
Edit: I guess my TLDR, is why have a card in your deck that you don't want?
We dont know yet if the keyword is going to have any support as in "whenever you "trade" a card gain x" but even without support its allready pretty decent, for example the destroy a weapon beast, you have included it in your deck to get rid of doomhammer, but you play against priest? No problem, just shuffle it back in and get something that might be useful now.
You're asking the wrong question.
Obviously I don't put cards in the deck that I don't want to play, however I do put cards in the deck that I only need in certain matchups, at least in a control deck.
Let's say for example that face decks infest the meta: in my deck I will put cards that heal me. If I can cycle them, even at 1 mana, I will cycle them when my opponent plays control.
The same goes for every tech card. But not only that, if I play control I must have AOE, if my opponent is OTK I don't need aoe so I cycle them.
Or I can cycle if I need solutions to a specific board or threat, not having answers in hand, or more generally to look for a specific card that can solve the game by itself.
Or maybe it allows me to play tech cards that otherwise I could not play, cards that move a lot in some MUs but against others are useless. In that case transforming the dead draw in a consumed mana seems to me positive.
And that's without talking about discovered cards.
Obviously this does not mean that the mechanics is OP. In theory the mechanic seems interesting, the strength, as always, will depend on how much Blizzard intends to charge for it.
Sorry for my broken english.
Well yeah, it would be great if you could trade out for stuff you need. At least as of now, however, Hearthstone decks aren't built that way. They're built for matchups and mana curves. Using your example of control vs OTK, going to your deck for more draw is just going to pull more of what you already didn't need. You've built the deck with heals, AOE and drawing is just going to get you more of what you don't need. It's just a bad matchup and your deck doesn't have the right answers. Another example is rush warrior vs no minion mage. For rush warrior, trading cards with your deck for more draw is just going to give you more rush minions. Again, I see the potential for tech cards, especially anti-weapon cards, but that's about the only use I think it will get.
Edit: Another way to put it. Imagine that every current card in the game had the tradeable mechanic on it. However, as a tradeoff every one of those cards now cost one more mana (in addition to the one mana cost of the trade). Would a 5 mana Hysteria that was tradeable make the cut?
True. People are acting as if Tradeable instantly gives you the card that you want, but that's certainly not the reality.
You are more likely to get another useless card, and you pay 1 Mana for that.
Like the snake card, for example. It's actually better to play it right away when available against Priest, for example, where the class has no weapon, instead of shuffling it into the deck, so that you aren't punished as hard as in later turns when there are more Mana (since you won't be able to play it regardless of whether or not you shuffle it into the deck, and Priest matches basically end up in fatigue), and if the opponent potentially has a weapon, you don't want to shuffle the card into the deck.
Most (all?) of the tradeable cards we've seen are good against aggro.
You're trading these cards because you want something bigger that's higher impact in slower match ups, not looking for answers in fast tempo/aggro match ups.
I think the keyword does have a lot of potential, but I fear that it'll be a letdown. I feel like this should be put on expensive minions or something so that they don't clog up your hand and improve your consistency. However, I fear that the keyword will be used as "We print a mediocre card that would never see play and then put tradable on it" instead of making actual good tradable cards. 3 mana 3/3 rush exists and never saw play. 1 mana gain 5 armour exists and never saw play. I doubt the small upside of tradable would make the cards worth running. Important to note with cards like Sigil Runner is that they do NOT shuffle back into your deck, meaning that they thin your deck, while tradable cards don't.
Not every deck is a curvestone deck. Tempo decks will probably not gain much from the new keyword, but control decks will love it. In the control vs OTK matchup you can use the tradeable cards to get your disruption like Dirty rat or Mutanus or to get another card draw to find what you need.
And tradeable cards are not overcosted. The viper has premium stats for the cost and the mage aoe has the same cost as Hellfire.