was playing someone who used this in casual. for the life of me, i could not understand the point of the deck at the time (kept killing their crap so that's probably what it was). seeing the list, i find the deck amusing. only thing i can think to change is maybe add the card that stealths your minions? might be good to keep your spell damage stuff out without worrying about the dying?
- ChooLer
- Registered User
-
Member for 9 years, 9 months, and 10 days
Last active Sun, Mar, 29 2020 14:57:37 -
- 16
- 41
- 104
- 2 Followers
- 563 Total Posts
- 986 Thanks
-
4
Zekana posted a message on TotalBiscuits "Ultimate Spellpower Rogue"Posted in: TotalBiscuits "Ultimate Spellpower Rogue" -
4
yohk posted a message on Zoo AlgorithmPosted in: Zoo AlgorithmI've played against people running decks like this who are higher than rank 5. The deck certainly has the potential to reach legend, it just takes skill and time. Maybe switch out some cards to better handle the decks you find yourself getting matched against often.
-
4
leahcim132 posted a message on Zoo AlgorithmPosted in: Zoo AlgorithmDo you think this will work past rank 5?
-
8
KashMonkey posted a message on Zoo AlgorithmPosted in: Zoo AlgorithmOne thing I have always struggled with... when I have a Soulfire and a Doomguard in my hand, how do I know when to use one, and when to use the other? I often find my self confused as to how to prioritize them, especially if I have a Doomguard and other critters in my hand, or I have a Doomguard but it isn't turn 5 yet. Can you help?
-
7
PoeticStanziel posted a message on Explicit Card Text Is Better Than Implicit Card TextPosted in: General DiscussionHearthstone has many examples of cards that do not fully explain the mechanics that govern their behaviour in play. Hearthstone also has examples of cards that imply certain mechanics, failing to explicitly state those mechanics on the card itself.
Explicit rules are always better than implied rules. Granted, in a video game, there's nobody to argue rules with. There's no need for adjudication or errata. The rules are applied equally and consistently across the board. But is this how newer players should be introduced to the game, situations where they have to guess at card action outcomes? Imagine being a new player and building your first collections of decks, but never quite knowing how the cards you're placing into those decks are going to behave. That's simply going to be a frustrating experience for new players.
If a developer has the option of letting a player know card behaviour rather than letting card behaviour be guesswork, why wouldn't they choose the explicit over the implicit? For some reason, the Hearthstone developers feel that implied rules are easier for new players to learn.
Fortunately, the Hearthstone developers have taken a step back from that notion of simplicity, promising (at least in certain situations) to make the implicit explicit. This has been especially notable in card previews for the upcoming Curse of Naxxramas adventure expansion. Cards that have a random effect are implied rather than defined. The reasoning for this is the way in which Hearthstone has been designed. It is meant to be fast-paced game with no interruption of a turn by a player on their opponent's turn. If a card that a player plays can have an action on their opponent's turn (such as deathrattle actions), then where that action might effect other (non-specifically stated) minions it will be applied randomly. Again, the reason for this is to keep turns flowing as quickly as possible. If players were allowed to interrupt their opponent's turns for time-outs and decision-making, the game would slow to a crawl. All of that said, though, the Hearthstone development team has decided to start making these random effects explicit in card text. So rather than "Deathrattle: Return a friendly minion to your hand" (where the randomness is implied) the card text will now read "Deathrattle: Return a random friendly minion to your hand" (where the randomness is now explicit).
There are still some areas where the developers have made no commitment to improving card text.
Take, for example, Druid of the Claw and Ancient of War. Both of these cards have identical verbiage, yet the cards behave very differently. Druid of the Claw is a transform, thus a 4/6 taunted Druid of the Claw remains that way, even if silenced. That is how the transform mechanic works, it cannot be silenced. Yet, the card itself gives no indication that the transform mechanic is being used. On the other hand, Ancient of War uses the buff mechanic, thus a 5/10 taunted Ancient of War can be silenced and it will revert to the original 5/5 minion. Again, Ancient of War gives no indication whether it is using the buff or transform mechanic.
Why don't the Hearthstone developers simply state that transform is the mechanic in use on Druid of the Claw? Instead of "Choose one ...", why not "Choose one to transform into ..."? There would be no need to even use the word buff on Ancient of War, since the lack of a stated transform mechanic would assume the buffed mechanic.
Consider Shadow Madness and Cabal Shadow Priest as two more examples. Both allow you to take control of an enemy minion. Yet, Shadow Madness imbues the "stolen" minion with an implied charge, allowing it to be used immediately. Whereas any minion "stolen" with Cabal Shadow Priest will have summoning sickness (unless it is already imbued with charge) and will not be usable on the turn it is stolen.
So why not simply change the text of Shadow Madness? Include "Until end of turn, gain control of an enemy minion with 3 or less Attack and give it charge" on the card text?
Why put players (especially new players) into a position where they have to guess card behaviour? Why put them through the frustration of losing games to figure how cards are supposed to behave? It makes very little sense to me. I do understand that the Hearthstone developers want to keep card text simple and to a minimum, but that shouldn't have to result in frustration for players new to the card.
(original article: http://hearthpoe.blogspot.com/2014/06/explicit-card-text-is-better-than.html)
-
7
Milkinator posted a message on Pip QuickwitPosted in: Pip Quickwitlol, favorite seen from that movie, "that's it, Einhorn is Finkle, Finkle is Einhorn, Einhorn is a man... oh my god, Einhorn is a man!"
-
9
enkeria posted a message on Pip QuickwitPosted in: Pip QuickwitTrivia: The name Finkle Einhorn is a reference from Ace Venture: Pet Detective. A comedy from 1994 starring Jim Carrey.
- To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
-6
no paladin deck can be viable without equality~
6
feels good man
2
Thanks for the VODs !
2
o/