Hearthpwn

If you double cast a Moontouched Amulet thanks to Solar Eclipse, Y'shaarj will not give you an additional Amulet after that. Don't know if this is intended or not

The engine just calculates the damage applied before the damage is done. It deals an instance of damage to the minion equal to its health, capped at 6, and the rest as a separate instance to the hero. Moarg happens after that calculation, amplifying the damage to the minions. 

Now that's why it behaves like this. Should it work differently is a matter of balance I think

Especially since most high-cost spells right now are ones that summon or buff boards, it's pretty obnoxious as you feel you're playing against token druid (BIG token). 

Warlock and paladin are annoying and strong yeah, but they aren't 100% unpredictable. You can know on a turn what they can do, and I do find some fun playing against paladins secrets. But lunacy mage, who just plays Expendable Performers into Pride's Fury, is pretty unfun.

Even if the Rancor itself doesn't kill the minions, but the Whirling Combatant's frenzy kills the minions, you get the bonus armor from rancor. 

I was against a board full of 2/4s (the typical scenario against a lunacy mage ofc). I played the whirling combattant, then rancor. The rancor hit first, leaving the minions with 1 health, but the the frenzy activated, killing them all, and i gained 14 armor.

Quote from Shadowrisen >>

I understand that fully.  The reason I'm condescending is exactly that.

People spend all the time bitching about a card and don't spend the brief amount of time necessary to realize they have a sure win against said hated deck.  That's worthy of quite a lot of condescension in my book.

As for the "not used to playing against it" . . . that's the game.  When you play a game of chess and you're staring at a mate in 1, if you miss the mate and subsequently lose, saying "I just haven't seen that board state enough times" will get you laughed out of the game.

The game in question was around the 15th game I've ever played with Tickatus, probably only the first or second I've ever played it against mage.  And yet I was able to calculate the odds that he already had all 4 pieces of C'thun in hand or played, count the number of draw spells he had played (all of them), and realize it was best to hold the Tickatus till he played the C'thun rather than just pray he still had a piece in the deck and mill it.  Am I saying this to act like I pulled off some brilliant play?  No, quite the opposite.  I'm saying it's a fairly easy thing to figure out even if you haven't been in the situation before.

 

EDIT:  And I know there's going to be someone who says something disparaging about me acting like I'm smart or whatever version of that complaint comes up today.  That's why I said in the OP the outcome of the game is irrelevant.  I had a 28 point something percent chance to lose even after playing correctly in the situation, because this is a game with RNG as an element.  How the dice ultimately come up is out of our hands, but whether or not we play the game correctly can weigh them heavily

 Yeah, and people hate Tickatus because 90% of the time there's no way to "play the game correctly" against it

Quote from Shadowrisen >>

Quote from PetiteMouche >>

Woah, lots of stupid assumptions in this thread, do you have any evidence that the opponent could complete C'thun and draw it on the same turn ? Maybe he wasn't expecting tickatus ? Maybe he didn't care or just forgot ? Maybe he had Mordresh in hand ready to destroy you anyway ?

Did you even win that game ? Oh yes my friend the result of this match does matter, because if you lost against "a guy who can't adjust his play against the most obvious danger" then what does that make you ? 

And do you have any evidence that this person that you can't interact with, is the same kind of person who complain about lack of interactivity ?

Sorry, you don't get why people hate Tickatus. And you're playing the easiest deck to pilot on earth with infinite removal, infinite healing and auto-win fatigue, so please, calm down.

 

 I know for a fact he could have completed it and drawn it the same turn.  I have the replay, though it wasn't necessary as I saw the 3 cost C'thun pieces he played from the far left of his hand.

The not expecting or not caring about Tickatus is my point.  People don't make the simplest most obvious changes in their play to beat the deck they're playing against.

He did not have Mordesh.  I know this because he played a Font of Power and got to keep 3 creatures on the turn before I Tickatus'ed.

Yes I won the game.  I milled the C'thun 4th card of 5.  Not that it matters, as the point was he turned a sure win into a likely loss by bad play.  Whether RNG saved him or not, it was a bad play.

So what assumptions did I make?  I suppose you're right, it was a stupid assumption to assume my opponent would play the game with the slightest understanding of a common matchup.  My bad.

 

EDIT:  @ singbanana

You are correct, that's why I started my post with stating that the matchup depends largely on how fast the opponent can round up all 4 c'thun pieces.  But in this case, since he was able to draw them and I was down to 12 or 14 life from burn and lifetap, he could have easily secured the win by ensuring I didn't get a chance to mill C'thun.  Instead he played like I was a warrior or some such and just ignored the only thing that could possibly lose him the game.

 

For those of you missing the point, Tickatus gets a lot of hate by people who seem to believe there's no way to address the threat.  And yet, when there's a way to perfectly play around him, people don't.  I chose this game to highlight because it was one of the more egregious examples, but it is not a one-time occurrence by any means.

Yeah, your exemple was a very fringe case where the C'thun player drew all their pieces before the Tickatus. The vast majority of the time that doesn't happen. So ofc maybe some players aren't used to playing aroud it, because except for some cases,they just can't. People don't complain about Tickatus because of the case exemple you gave. They complain because in the vast majority of other games there wasn't anything they could do. You're missing the point of people pointing out your very condescending post, saying people complain about Tickatus because they're too dumb to play around it, while in reality they're complaining that the vast majority of times they just can't play around it. 

Quote from ShadowAldrius >>

Quote from DNsingbanana >>

Pretty outlier game here, most of the time you would've played Tickatus on turn 8 and burned a c'thun  piece. Or if you didn't, burnt one turn 10 with Y'shaarj. That's why people hate that card. Cause most of the time you can't play against it. 

 Their point is, you can.  You apply pressure to your opponent and don't let them get away with playing a 6 mana card that has no board impact.

Honestly, the main thing is now, Warlock has such a huge number of board clears, and Jaraxxus as a win condition, that Warlock has plenty of opportunities to sneak a Tickatus in, and maybe get lucky and burn something important.

Well you said it yourself. The point is you can't. 

Pretty outlier game here, most of the time you would've played Tickatus on turn 8 and burned a c'thun  piece. Or if you didn't, burnt one turn 10 with Y'shaarj. That's why people hate that card. Cause most of the time you can't play against it. 

In order to use him, you kindof have to have more than just 2 frenzy minions in your deck, however most of the frenzies have pretty very varying effects. This leads to the card being really unreliable, and i think it would make way more sense if it let you discover twice a minion to resurrect in order choose what suits the situation (even if it means saurfang's cost has to go to 8 to balance it out)

Alex and ysera are pretty good in a tempo-midrange list, but most of the midrange decks have actually better finishers than them

The fact they have such high stats for the cost makes them pretty op for me I'd say. Removal is uneffective, because there is few removal that matches them at their mana cost, and they have as much attack and more health than most minions at their cost aswell. So trading is uneffective, removing is uneffective. Also, they are from a design standpoint as unfun as can be. Games with them are boring and/or frustrating. I'm a big control player, and have been in favor of slowing down the meta, but there was a lot other ways to do that than.. those. 

It's problematic because of libram paladin aswell i'd say

Even if those were balanced, this has got to be one of the least fun mechanic ever printed. Does nothing, prevents your opponent from doing things. I am all for printing anti-aggro tools and a slower meta, but there are different ways to achieve that than those watchpost

Kinda funny to "just use a removal spell" when the watchposts are overstated for their mana cost

The science has been done! If galoping savior is transformed into a minion by smythe, and you play cards before killing the minion, those cards are still counted for galoping savior. However, galoping savior will not trigger as soon as it is put back into play by killing the minion, but as soon as you play one more card.