Hearthpwn

Quote from Zizka >>

Out of curiosity, why are you playing strategy games for speed? You don’t play chess expecting to cram in a game during a commercial, do you? What does it matter if you play four games an hour or 8? Is it because you want to grind as quickly as possible? 

It’s weird to me when people complain that Hearthstone games last for too long, as if it’s a given that they shouldn’t. 

There’s a lot of wrong things with HS and they could use a better design team asap. But I personally don’t find the argument of: « Why are you playing chess when you play five games of Marvel Snap? » Like, so what? Who cares if you’re playing 20 games or 1 as long as you’re having fun. 

Must be a generation thing where everything needs to be shortened now for consumption, the Twitter Effect. Same thing with Marvel, THE AVENGERS ASSEMBLE OMG 2 KEWL!

As for the comparison, it’s incredibly faulty and illogical and the reasons have already been stated. Hearthstone can be extremely frustrating but providing unfair and faulty arguments doesn’t do much apart as exposing flaws in one’s character.

If you are replying to my post, I didn't start playing Snap for the speed of the game.  As a long time HS player, I knew Snap was coming, and I wanted to give it a try.  I have been pleased with how fun AND fast games are.
As far as this being an age/generational, "Twitter Effect" issue for wanting quick games, I have 6 kids, the youngest of which is 21 years old.  Hell, I even have 2 grand-kids.  So it's not a generational issue with me, anyway.

Never can I recall a card that made me FSB for both playing against, and playing with.  I was tired of having/playing a great game against a great opponent, only to lose to Sire Denathrius .   So I figured I'd play Sire Denathrius in my deck.
That lasted a total of 3 games.  Winning with Sire Denathrius, is not fun at all.  I won 2 of 3 games, but the winning with Sire Denathrius felt gross.  I HATED winning in such a way. so I don't even run it, once again.

/yuck

Quote from RendInFriend >>

Back in my day you had to work for your win, clearing taunts before you shadowstepped leeroy. These kids now have everything handed to them with OTKs like denathrius and they never knew how hard it was to deal with a jade Druid or spirit claw shaman.

I liked the "Back in my day..." statement.  I've been playing since closed beta (Oct.2013), yet I totally know what your saying.  "Back in the day" (LOL), I didn't mine to losing to an OTK deck like with Grim Patron, but these new OTK's are not just unfun lose to, but they are also unfun to play IMO.           

Damn-it!!!!!
I said I wouldn't spend any money on Mercenaries,  Then they went and threw a "Card Back" into a bundle.  Has someone who has been playing since closed beta (Sept. 2013) I have almost every card back; so I of course had to buy the Edwin bundle just for the card back....

😒

 LOL !!!

Diablo sucks !!! I've never played as him (nor will I), but I beat him 90%+ of the time.
What sucks is when he fights all players, and even though I hit face, Diablo is Immune every 4 turns.

Yes, give BG's a try.  Once I gave Battlegrounds a proper try, I found it really is a fun mode.   It's a great way to play and uses a totally different strategy than regular 'ladder' play.
Plus your collection size doesn't matter, all players pick cards from the BG card pool after each round.

It's an ok cardback...

Quote from Aelfscyne >>

What? When the Tiller is immune it doesn't take damage but it still DEALS damage. 

And the Tiller doesn't deal infinite damage.  The play is if the health of the minions on the field other than the Tiller equals half your opponent's armor+health then you win.

 Tiller neither takes nor deals damage if you use Shrinkmeister on him while he is immune.  Then the damage becomes infinite, only stopping at 60 damage a turn, which is a "Hard Stop" within the Hearthstone game

Couldn't they have just had Wretched Tiller state "Whenever this minion deals damage, deal 2 damage to enemy hero". ???

Seems to me like that would fix everything......

Yeah, for what it's worth most of Texas does not look like this, only the far edge of south/west Texas near New Mexico and the Mexican border is desert. Texas is mostly heavily wooded with lots of hills and rivers, with wetlands in the east and plains way up in the north.

Please tell me you’re joking.
Please. 

You’re not seriously complaining about having to read a single sentence or two are you? Since the card effect is then memorised, you need to do this once or twice. If you are, I don’t think I’ve ever read a more bogus complaint in my whole life. 

Quote from ZCFlayer >>

Marvel Snap is a stupid game, it's really very simple. You go all in every time and hope for the best, you win if you drew better. That's the whole game pretty much!

Maybe more interesting cards or modes will come out at some point and make it more interesting. At the moment it's almost zero strategy required making it exceptionally boring once you played for a little while.

There's a lot HS could do better but it's orders of magnitude better than Snap is.

 You can like it or dislike it. It is your personal opinion. Anyway. It is for sure not simple. 
In my opinion once you tried and you have understood the game you realized that it is far more complex than HS. Yes at first impact it seems easy, you have to take at least 2 bases (but like it is HS. Kill your opponent, that’s it). But then you realize that it is not simple at all. And you have not to throw minions at random in the bases, but if you want to be good, you need math, strategy and probability. It is more complex than HS in many things. 

Even elephants poop better than Blizzard and their stupidity at the development.

Marvel Snap came out a week ago and is leveraging the most popular brand on earth. Hearthstone is pushing 8 years old and is on the tail end of it's expansion cycle. 

A five year old could point out the holes in your logic. 

Quote from Faustivious >>

Quote from olestuga >>

Quote from Andrei2007 >>

While I am not a big fan of Denathrius in standard, the fact that you let a rogue get to 10 mana in wild is totally on you mate.

 So I'm supposed to play aggro in wild? The card is overpowered AND unfun regardless of win/loss. It feels dirty even when you win with it. 

https://www.hearthpwn.com/forums/hearthstone-general/card-discussion/253982-sire-denathrius
I totally feel your pain with Sire Denathrius
Here's a link to a recent thread where people are basically stating the same things.

 Of course I have seen that thread, but wanted to ask about the card retaining Infuse when going backward, because I didn't expect it to become a new card with every Infuse which I honestly think would be fine if it damaged minions only.

Quote from Dieseloctane >>

Sad to see that the community has devolved to this. A bunch of crying children that can't stand counter play or having their netdeck strategies torn apart by a card or two. Grow up. Hearthstone is the least interactive game on the market. It's about time they added more cards with disruption effects. I say bring on MORE cards like Mutanus, Denathrius and Theotar. Especially hand disruption. Nothing better than watching your opponent concede because they lost one card. 

 In theory yes, in practice, you win by the Theotaring your opponents Theotar so you can Theotar their Denathrius. You can still always play mutanus and hope you hit denathrius and not one of the expendable minions that infuses him. However we all know mutanus should have the text changed to “eat your opponent’s lowest cost card, if your opponent plays this, it eats your highest cost card.”
The deck you are looking for is Thief Priest, it’s hand disruption as a win condition. It loses 19/20 matches, but the one match it wins, the opponent doesn’t just concede, they uninstall. Denathrius is the opposite of what you are arguing for, it’s just bad design. Payoff for playing minions shouldn’t be lethal damage from hand, otherwise, what’s the point of playing spells?

Totally agree. They could buff the initial lifesteal but have it not deal face damage. They could even lower his cost then. It could still be relevant as a life steal board clear, just enough with massive face damage already. 

It's about time to nerf it for sure. It's been the win condition of almost every slow deck and has definitely overstayed its welcome. I think the game is way more fun when each class actually wins in different ways...

I hear you, it's made me play a lot less just because it sucks so much. Feels like cheating when you have a good back and forth in fighting for board control and then the other guy just slaps down Sire or even good ol Brann+Sire to give you the big finger. Happens way too often.

That card should to be removed imho, I don't think there's a nerf that's good enough and wouldn't destroy it anyways.