partyphone
Banned
I recently put Harrison into my control warrior. the first game I play with it is against control paladin. I top deck Harrison the turn after killing tirion. so good.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Hearthstone |OT| Why tap cards when you can roll need [Naxx final wing out now]
- Thread starter Minsc
- Start date
- Status
I recently put Harrison into my control warrior. the first game I play with it is against control paladin. I top deck Harrison the turn after killing tirion. so good.
Old packs become 20-50g or something. I don't anticipate them deleting cards.
What about Arcane Golem or Reckless Rocketeer?
I have Leeroy, but I'm just thinking out loud about alternative cards that have charge.
Arcane seems like a good choice if you use it late game or as a finisher, no? Then the extra mana crystal your opponent gets won't really matter.
Well, you don't necessarily need a charger. Not all hunters ran it. It's just it has good burst and synergises really well with ULH. You could run a Arcane Golem but, I'd also argue taking a Snapjaw or Kodo would probably be better. Arcane Golems are only really good in face decks imo. Reckless on the other hand costs too much mana for it to be that good.
Mobius and pet octopus
Member
I've never been personally fond of the leeroy hunter decks. And I assume it is in response to a heavy control meta.
It's hard to say no to 6-8 damage!
Every Hunter deck, regardless of speed, relies on a certain amount of reach. Leeroy just provides reach in spades.
partyphone
Banned
also leeroy has great synergy with unleash
What kind of answers are you expecting with such a statement?
partyphone
Banned
how is it shallow?
Don't think he cared for answers. Just a drive by on how much the game sucks in his opinion.
RumblingRosco
Member
Regarding nerfing Mad Scientist, I think it is fine as-is, but if he had to be nerfed, make it a 1/2 or a 2/1, not a full-on 1/1.
Minsc
Gold Member
Well the main drawbacks that I see are:
- No ability to play cards to interrupt your opponents attacks
- No ability to select blockers
- 1 mana pool for all cards
- No actual mana cards
- Boring set of rules (very simple and limited)
- Small amount of cards/combos
- Only 1v1
The biggest thing by far is the inability to play stuff like giant growth when blocking an attacking creature from an opponent letting yours win instead of theirs (or potentially them responding to your giant growth with a similar card of their own), or to use your cards on their turn. Followed closely by not having multiple kinds of mana to allow for creating multi-cost cards (3 Black + 3 Red vs 1 Black + 1 Red + 4 Any - the 3 Black + 3 Red is going to be stronger because the stricter requirement).
Or imagine if you could lightning bolt a Leeroy on their turn after they buff it with a cold blood once they declare it as attacking... and so on.
Still, some classes give me TONS of trouble, like a Priest deck... I feel like no matter how hard I try, I am making 3+ big misplays that influence the game every match... there's still a lot of choices to make every turn, especially with certain classes.
Letterbomb
Banned
When will people learn that simplicity is not necessarily mediocrity? I love this game for its simplistic values. It's entirely accessible but also leaves a ton of room for growth and in-game development. Takes a while to master, for sure.
Magic and Hearthstone are both good games. No need to drive by for a bash.
Magic and Hearthstone are both good games. No need to drive by for a bash.
partyphone
Banned
that's not shallow. that's unencumbered by a lot of mechanics.
next you'll be telling me that Go is shallow.
EnVy_CaLiBeR
Member
What would you guys do here?
Letterbomb
Banned
Jaraxus mang.
Minsc
Gold Member
That's a cheap cop out, why not explain how it's not more shallow by not having the things I listed.
How does removing the ability to play cards or build decks from multiple sources of mana not make it less complex, aka, more shallow. I gave specific examples in my post of how those interactions allow for deeper exchanges than what is in Hearthstone.
Simple fact is, attacking in MtG is a significantly deeper process than in Hearthstone because you never know what your opponent will do to their creatures or yours if they decide to block, which again is something you don't know when you attack. You may have a 6/6 trample and they have a 1/1, but they could still block that 6/6 trample and turn their 1/1 in to a 8/8 and trade ahead of your creature. There's a ton more interaction and strategy involved in MtG.
TheSadRanger
Banned
Someday I'll be just like you!!
Should be the name of the new OT
Should be the name of the new OT
Yup, I wish the MTGO had a better interface and wasn't so damn expensive. I guess then no one would buy the physical cards.
Definitely not Illidan.
Cairne is certainly extremely strong in Arena because he is an independently strong value minion. However Jaraxxus is certainly no slouch, as he would be typically much stronger in arena that he would be in constructed because arena is typically slower than constructed, and he would be extremely strong during topdeck wars.
I would probably make the choice based upon your mana curve. If you have a lot of fairly cheap minions, I would probably choose Jaraxxus because that means you're going to be using your hero power a lot for card draw, which means you get below 15 hp faster and you're more likely to get into topdeck wars.
If you have a lot more heavier minions, I would go for Cairne because you won't be tapping as much and so you want those value cards to help maintain board control.
CommandThrower
Member
A few hours ago, I had what may be greatest victory so far in Hearthstone.
I was taking on a Shaman, with my janky control Warrior deck. The game goes on pretty long. We're trading all over the place, but I manage to whittle him down to 12 HP or so. At this point, I have no minions on the board. I've got a Faceless Manipulator and I'm just waiting and hoping for something good to drop on his side.
Sure enough, he plays Ragnaros. Next turn, I draw a Death's Bite, play it and play my Faceless as a copy of his Ragnaros. I swing at his hero with the axe for four, and Ragnaros fireballs his hero to finish the job. "Well played"s were exchanged.
Then I proceeded to go on a losing streak. :[ Oh well, this victory will stick with me for a long time. :]
I was taking on a Shaman, with my janky control Warrior deck. The game goes on pretty long. We're trading all over the place, but I manage to whittle him down to 12 HP or so. At this point, I have no minions on the board. I've got a Faceless Manipulator and I'm just waiting and hoping for something good to drop on his side.
Sure enough, he plays Ragnaros. Next turn, I draw a Death's Bite, play it and play my Faceless as a copy of his Ragnaros. I swing at his hero with the axe for four, and Ragnaros fireballs his hero to finish the job. "Well played"s were exchanged.
Then I proceeded to go on a losing streak. :[ Oh well, this victory will stick with me for a long time. :]
Against the warrior? I did was awesome. Then I watched him talk shit about Druids and promptly get his ass kicked lol
lawlohwhat
Banned
This game allows stupid people to win games with bad decisions because it broadens the customer base. This is an intentional game design decision that will put off people who have played magic, but it really isn't that different from any casual game that is appealing to a broad audience.
People are generally dumb, but dumb people have money. This game is hardly an esport like sc2 or anything similar, but there's a good reason that viewership has severely declined for games like that which are difficult to play.
Almost nobody has the time or can afford the sedentary lifestyle that will accommodate the demands of professional gaming in this part of the world.
People are generally dumb, but dumb people have money. This game is hardly an esport like sc2 or anything similar, but there's a good reason that viewership has severely declined for games like that which are difficult to play.
Almost nobody has the time or can afford the sedentary lifestyle that will accommodate the demands of professional gaming in this part of the world.
I have never really seen anyone say otherwise. Not sure why this really needs to be on repeat in this thread though. Everyone knows that.
I think its fine with the exception that it should probably be a 1/1 or a 2/1 at least. The 2 HP and 2 attack is a bit much for pulling a 3 mana card deep from a deck and playing it also. But I think they weighed it at 2/2 because not all classes secrets cost the same, its tremendous value for my mage, much less so for a pally where secrets are only 1 mana anyway. Plus, I don't want the "Get DAOWN" or Redemption being put into play when all I have on the board is a fairy dragon or a 1/1, thats a huge waste.
For the pally class the card has to at LEAST be a 2/2 to even be worth thinking about using IMO.
So I tried it out. It's not fast or consistent enough to close things out before big taunters become a problem, it doesn't have ways to gain card advantage, it can't recover from board clears with good topdecks, and removing stuff with your face puts you in lethal range quickly.. so it still suffers from all the same problems as the old Reynad rush deck, unfortunately. That, plus you can't get max value out of Grommash without some way to activate him.
Professor Lich
Member
Hearthstone |OT2| The Happiest Place on NeoGAF
I bet that's taken though.
I bet that's taken though.
Freyjadour
Member
The Happiest Placerino on GAF
I didn't ask a question why would I be expecting answers?
I thought you were over the "serious" phase of this game man, come on don't succumb to the lowest levels of trash Yoshi.
Reluctant-Hero
Member
Is hearthstone iOS down right now? It's not loading the main menu.
Edit: Bleh, guess the delay was due to the first time my wife was playing the game.
Edit: Bleh, guess the delay was due to the first time my wife was playing the game.
ShinNL
Member
Hearthstone |OT2| Ignoring the meta
By the way, I don't think I'll be playing control Shaman much more. Warrior is stronger in every department. Amazing armoring, crazy AoE, better card draw, IMO better single target removal, stronger burst and more room for legendaries.
And funny enough, because of how the meta is right now, I'm actually doing extremely well with a deck version that has no brawl, shield slam and gorehowl.
By the way, I don't think I'll be playing control Shaman much more. Warrior is stronger in every department. Amazing armoring, crazy AoE, better card draw, IMO better single target removal, stronger burst and more room for legendaries.
And funny enough, because of how the meta is right now, I'm actually doing extremely well with a deck version that has no brawl, shield slam and gorehowl.
Yoshichan
And they made him a Lord of Cinder. Not for virtue, but for might. Such is a lord, I suppose. But here I ask. Do we have a sodding chance?
You're absolutely right.
I actually went down from 18h/day to just doing dailies and playing with friends while doing Naxx content for the past 14 days and it feels great. But even doing dailies can be frustrating at times...
MisterArrogant
Neo Member
I vote for this!
- Status