• 1

    posted a message on Shaman is absurd in duels

    Finally, Shaman is good somewhere!

    Posted in: Duels
  • 0

    posted a message on Stop playing Alex in every Deck
    Quote from PetiteMouche >>

    It's a dead card for at least 8 turns, win before turn 9 if you're aggro or keep your health total high enough if you're control.

    Force them to use Alex for the heal or to target one of your minions.

     This is a good point, if you suspect/assume an aggro deck is running Alex, just take measures to make sure you don't go below 9 Health.  Play to stay above 8 and you should be fine.

    Posted in: Card Discussion
  • 9

    posted a message on Stop playing Alex in every Deck

    I'm not sure how you came to the conclusion that it's a control card.  It clearly does 8 damage to whatever I want to so I can put it in any deck I want to.  Weirdly enough it also heals?  Me or my minions?  That's not really necessary but it's cool I guess - but I'll point it face to win games and smile because Alexstraza is a cool dragon :)

    Posted in: Card Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on If people complain about a card, even when it isn't good, that's more of a sign that it's bad for the game
    Quote from SinAscendant >>
    Quote from xskarma >>

    Cut out the politics discussion. That is not something we allow. 

     The only thing that the rules ban is hateful language about political beliefs, and I don't believe we've used any of that here.  If there is meant to be a blanket ban on political discussions, you should probably add that to the rules. 

     To be fair, the one of the first posts to bring it up was firing off the r-word, which is hate speech against people with autism.  That's the kind of stuff I'd normally report.  Political discussion has its place in the context of discussing card games for various reasons (eg. economical discourse about the accessibility of card games is inherently political because politics has an effect on who can afford what) but I get the mods wanting to keep the site clear of political discussion.  Political discussion online brings people around I'd rather not share spaces with, and that the mods would have to busily remove.

    Ultimately a lot of the weird rhetoric around aggro being "instant gratification" and "slower decks being better because they have delayed gratification" is a load of bunk, and comes from a place of believed superiority.  A few control players out there seem to think very highly of themselves for the way they prefer to play the game, which is toxic and leads to non-conversations with somebody who will never change their mind about anything.  That sort of thing has bothered me for a long time, and it'll never go away.  The best anybody can do is prove them wrong and move on even if they keep waxing philosophically in circles, only letting themselves come to the conclusion they've settled on already.

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on Which battle-ready deck did you get?
    Quote from M0res >>

    I can’t believe people are buying this……. Before you know it a nerf and a mini expansion will result in an obsolete deck 

     I deleted the deck mere seconds after buying it.  I wanted the cards.

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on Mysteries of the Phoenix cardback

    I mentioned this to somebody on twitter, but I'll drop it here too in case it's in any way helpful:

    The card back is Kael'Thas themed.  The 3 green orbs, the red and gold, down to the name in the files.
    Kael'Thas is a fella who loves the number 3, apparently.  So my first guess would be doing things in 3's, or doing 3 different things.

    Also, since it's Kael'Thas themed and he was from the Outland set, this might have to start on the Outland board.

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 1

    posted a message on Which battle-ready deck did you get?

    I bought the Warlock one.  It's a class I have very few cards for that I'm developing a fondness for, so I went with it.  Great dust value for the 20 bucks too.  20 bucks in packs sometimes doesn't net you one legendary, let alone like 4.

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 2

    posted a message on Wrath of Air..!

    I was in favor of the change because Wrath of Air seemed too high rolly.  Is it really that big of a positive for Shaman to have a completely unreliable Spell Damage boost out of their Hero Power?  I don't think so.  Looking at everything Shaman is capable of doing, Strength Totem is a perfectly fine lil totem who's going to do their best.

    Shaman's problems are fundamental and rooted in the design of the class and its cards.  Its Hero Power being the worst in the game (or at least in the bottom 3) only sucks as hard as it does because the rest of the class stinks on ice.  At least Hunter, with its pretty bad Hero Power, is structured in a way that actually makes it really strong, and a logical feature of the class.  Nothin about Shaman and all of its mechanics really leads "summon a random totem that MIGHT help" as a logical feature.

    Shaman needs Draw.  It needs efficient cards.  It needs Overload to suck less.  It needs to be given actual burn spells.  Shaman got like 3 different Spell Damage tools recently with the Imprisoned Phoenix, Bru'kan, and Novice Zapper but absolutely jack to take advantage of those with.  Mage gets all the card draw it wants, and the most efficient burn in the whole game.  Shaman gets Spell Damage, but no spells.  or draw.  or a good Hero Power, just for good measure.

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on If people complain about a card, even when it isn't good, that's more of a sign that it's bad for the game

    I agree that some people appear to believe that the patterns they observe are the whole of possible experiences.  "Tickatus ruined my game, and does so often, so Tickatus must ruin every game" sort of mind set.  That's a thing, I get that.

    But the Myth of the Given has nothing to do with opposing empirical evidence and statistics showing that every competitive game, from card games to fighting games to competitive First-Person Shooters, has strategies, tools, characters, weapons, and cards that are factually worse than others.  In most fighting games (this is probably hyperbole but whatever) only like 30% of a character roster is competitively viable.  In competitive FPS environments, even though every gun is capable of being strong in some players hands, the ones that are the easiest to use with the most success are the ones that get used most often.  If Akimbo 1887's that 1-shot people across the map is the best strategy, those with access to it are factually more likely to do so in a competitive environment.  Like now, Paladin in Standard and Mage in Wild are both everywhere, positing a large percentage of play over other classes in those formats because people know they're most likely to win with them.

    I'm not defending Blizzard, I'm defending hard and fast - known - concepts in game design.  Dominant Strategy is a real thing, not simply a paradigm that only exists because people believe it does.  I've known about it for long before I played a Blizzard game, it's not some wacky concept that Blizzard constantly talks about to diffuse conversation around balance.

    The dominance of aggro is not "inevitable", and I'm not sure anybody even said that.  I said a reason aggro is heavily played is because it's the most accessible type of deck, most commons and rares can make an aggro deck function, without needing tons of high value legendaries like some control decks might.  There's also time constraints, budgetary restraints, and many other factors that lead people to play aggro aside from sheer preference.  But unless you can prove otherwise, it's not a lie that people will favor what helps them win easiest when they have access to it.

    And that last comment is so asinine I won't even attempt to argue it.  That's Shapiro levels of "that was so dumb I'll look like an idiot responding to it".

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on Highlighting enemy Hero portrait in game.

    I've never really noticed something like that and came to that conclusion.  I play a lot of aggressive decks, so normally when somebody's hovering me, I just assume they're squelching me.  I've played a lot of people who emote spam me when I play aggro and they win with control or something, so I guess people assume that when I do well I'll emote spam?  I'm not sure.

    Myself, if I'm hovering around, I'm figuring out lines in my head and mimicking the plays I'd make with my mouse.  Like "if I send this and this face I'll have X damage in hand, they're at Z Health, blah blah blah" and stuff like that.  I never considered bming though hovering, though.

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 1

    posted a message on If people complain about a card, even when it isn't good, that's more of a sign that it's bad for the game

    It's impossible to perfectly balance any competitive game.  There will always be a "best deck", a "best class", or a "best strategy".
    Dominant strategy has been a factor in games forever, a concept that more or less says that players will generally lean towards doing whatever it is makes them win the easiest.

    CCG's make that trickier because of their monetization, typically.  You can't always just do the best thing, since that could be out of reach.  Then you do the next best thing.  That's why aggro tends to be popular and good.  It's accessible, devs know that, so they make aggro work well.

    Painting the game developers as this sinister cabal of people out to violate the rights of their players is outright fascist rhetoric, by the way.  They're just people who love Hearthstone and happen to make the game.  They're not perfect, robotic people who are even capable of designing a perfectly balanced game (which is impossible to do).  I generally support anti-corporate sentiment; corporations are actively destroying the planet and they only exist to make a profit.  However, individual designers on the Hearthstone team cannot be burdened with the responsibility for the way their parent companies demand they monetize and otherwise create the game.  Hate Blizzard-Activision all you want, you can also blame Devs for releasing overpowered cards - it's their job - but to imply that they're evil or otherwise anything sinister is bad faith, and practically insane.

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on The only Nerf required: Remove Discover asap!

    Discover at its best is really just card advantage.  Whether or not it's random really isn't that relevant, but cards that do a thing and then translate into gaining more cards is real strong.  The point has been made on this thread that the strongest decks in Standard are in fact the ones that do random things the least, they're very calculated and don't deviate from their deck much.

    One of the reasons Demon Hunter is able to be so powerful is because it lacks built in random effects.  Face Hunter has a similar strength, it doesn't need to depend on RNG any more than any deck in a card game does (drawing cards is RNG).  And of course, Paladin right now randomly pulls secrets out of the deck, but that's basically form of card draw - the cards just cost (0) in a way.  Other than that they don't need Random Generation to be good or strong.  That's the thing with aggro/midrange, they are sort of forced to make the most out of the resources they don't have access to, since if they spend time dedicated to random generation they're not progressing the game plan of hit-the-face.

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 1

    posted a message on Hearthstone needs a Report Feature SO BAD

    It looks like I'm in the wrong here about my experience today.  I knew from the outset that there's plenty of reasons a person might take a while for their turns, and I could have just dipped out since it was casual and there wasn't really a reason not to.  I guess I was just stubborn, and roping makes me cranky enough to complain here about it.

    It's impossible to know/prove the motivations for roping, and it's not in good faith to just assumed they're doing it for BM.
    That's my bad.

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on Hearthstone needs a Report Feature SO BAD
    Quote from PetiteMouche >>

     

     If the guy was carefully thinking out his turns, I'd be able to tell.

    Care to elaborate this bold claim ?

     If they were thinking out their turns, they'd play their cards later, right?  It's not that hard to intuit when somebody's just messing with you vs. when they have hard decisions to make.  There wasn't any hovering on their cards during either of our turns.  They'd turbo out their cards, consider trades (the arrow being the tell there), then make them and wait out their turn until the rope popped.

    If we're operating in good faith, which I suppose I should be - they could be considering their next turn during the end of their own turn, that way if I turbo my turn real fast they'd still have had time to consider their options.  That doesn't explain why they didn't play a card for the first 3 turns.  I think most of us have played long enough to be able to tell when somebody is roping because they're thinking and roping because they're just bein' rude.  The hovering, the timing with which they play their cards.  They were playing Standard Libram Paladin; a deck I can't really attest to being complicated or not since I don't play it.  I was playing Wild Tavish/Beast Hunter.

    Quote from Ecthelion2 >>

    As far as I know, there isn't an XP bonus to winning in casual, so why not just surrender? If he is trying to farm XP, then the faster that you concede, the less efficient his farming technique becomes because he's spending more time in queue (correct me if the XP system works differently).

     To be honest, it's a lose-lose for me.  I'm just salty enough that I don't want them to just get a free win off of me because they're roping, and I stick it out to avoid giving them that satisfaction just to suffer through a boring, too-long game.  It didn't help that I had rolled the best opening hand I've had in a while with the deck and I was really excited to play it out.

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 3

    posted a message on Anti-meta LoE Warrior

    Warrior as a class is one of my least played;
    That being said this list is super cool, and would definitely motivate me to play it when I have the cards.

    Favorited for that day.

    Posted in: Anti-meta LoE Warrior
  • To post a comment, please login or register a new account.