Played some drunkstone in the wee hours of the morning. Turns out double vision isn't always bad. In fact, it won me the game!
More seriously, that turn was my first actual attack to the shaman himself in the entire game. 28 damage. The other two came from him frost shocking my leper gnome early on.
I saw something cool from a druid today. He was playing some kind of a token hybrid, with wild growths and gadgetzans. At 10 mana he put down a gadgetzan, wild growth (1 draw) and excess mana (2 draws), turning a late wild growth into 3 cards. Interesting way to hedge.
"Favorite" card to discover someone has tech'd into a deck: Molten Giant. No, seriously, I absolutely love finding out that a Miracle Rogue just got a cheap 8/8 minion or that the Freeze Mage is, in fact, a Giants Mage. What could be better in life?
Wait, is handlock supposed to be a counter to miracle rogue or the other way around, lol.
I find handlock a hard matchup, but I haven't been playing miracle rogue long, it requires you to draw specific cards much more then other matchups since they'll have taunts out by the time you get rolling
So I finally got enough dust to craft Alex, and it seems freeze mage, while infuriating to play against, is kind of hard to actually win with. And playing against priest is the worst thing for both of you!
Wait, is handlock supposed to be a counter to miracle rogue or the other way around, lol.
I've heard it counters rogue, but I think it really depends on your draw. They don't have an answer for early mountain giants and taunt, but if you don't get them they can easily otk you.
Also, I'm starting to get worried about the way Hearthstone words cards. I understand that since the game runs the rules for you, the wording doesn't have to be laser precise so that a referee can unambiguously interpret the card if there is a dispute, but I'm starting to think their "go with what feels best" approach could lead to problems. As it stands, you mostly have to know that every card that activates on your opponent's turn is random in general, and a few specific things (bane of doom, lightwell, etc).
However, as expansions add in more cards, and many cards become used for specific tricky decks or simply become less popular due to the increased card pool (or in bane of doom's case, nobody playing it to begin with), non standardized wording could increase the barrier to entry and lead to players being frustrated by misunderstanding multiple ambiguous cards. I understand that one match won't sway people, and that it's easy to learn any individual card, but as large numbers of cards are released and large numbers of new people try large numbers of games, I can see imprecise wording having an aggregate negative effect on the game.
Also also, while Naxx is 30 cards, I believe they've stated they want true expansions (and not single player experiences+cards) to be 100+ cards, which offers more potential for oddness.
First match of a new arena run, my opponent gets out a Dust Devil and Goldshire Footman first turn. I had a poor first draw, and didn't have anything to play until turn 3. He got me down to 7 health by turn 4 or 5, then I rallied and beat him. (I'm learning to love the Warrior's armor ability)
Also, I'm starting to get worried about the way Hearthstone words cards. I understand that since the game runs the rules for you, the wording doesn't have to be laser precise so that a referee can unambiguously interpret the card if there is a dispute, but I'm starting to think their "go with what feels best" approach could lead to problems. As it stands, you mostly have to know that every card that activates on your opponent's turn is random in general, and a few specific things (bane of doom, lightwell, etc).
However, as expansions add in more cards, and many cards become used for specific tricky decks or simply become less popular due to the increased card pool (or in bane of doom's case, nobody playing it to begin with), non standardized wording could increase the barrier to entry and lead to players being frustrated by misunderstanding multiple ambiguous cards. I understand that one match won't sway people, and that it's easy to learn any individual card, but as large numbers of cards are released and large numbers of new people try large numbers of games, I can see imprecise wording having an aggregate negative effect on the game.
Some of the stuff was super confusing for me at first.
For example, the in-game wording for Stealth is "Can't be attacked or targeted until it deals damage." In reality, it's only enemy stuff that can't target it. This totally confused me when my opponent did stuff to his stealthed minions.
I'd probably take the third Flamestrike over most other cards. The fourth I'd honestly have to think about. Would depend on my curve, cause in theory you still need a late game minion or two and that's getting to be a heavy backend.
I'd probably end up taking it, but it'd put me in the tank .
Also, I'm starting to get worried about the way Hearthstone words cards. I understand that since the game runs the rules for you, the wording doesn't have to be laser precise so that a referee can unambiguously interpret the card if there is a dispute, but I'm starting to think their "go with what feels best" approach could lead to problems. As it stands, you mostly have to know that every card that activates on your opponent's turn is random in general, and a few specific things (bane of doom, lightwell, etc).
However, as expansions add in more cards, and many cards become used for specific tricky decks or simply become less popular due to the increased card pool (or in bane of doom's case, nobody playing it to begin with), non standardized wording could increase the barrier to entry and lead to players being frustrated by misunderstanding multiple ambiguous cards. I understand that one match won't sway people, and that it's easy to learn any individual card, but as large numbers of cards are released and large numbers of new people try large numbers of games, I can see imprecise wording having an aggregate negative effect on the game.
Some of the stuff was super confusing for me at first.
For example, the in-game wording for Stealth is "Can't be attacked or targeted until it deals damage." In reality, it's only enemy stuff that can't target it. This totally confused me when my opponent did stuff to his stealthed minions.
yeah there's a lot of really subtle "this is our first CCG" trip-ups that aren't as obvious as things like "nat pagle is fucking ridiculously good", and bad wording is one of them
Posts
More seriously, that turn was my first actual attack to the shaman himself in the entire game. 28 damage. The other two came from him frost shocking my leper gnome early on.
Allegedly the class cards are obtainable for completing a class-specific Naxx challenge, so as it stands, it is only a single card per class.
Plus the 21 neutral cards.
Have we seen these 21 neutral cards?
I saw the legendaries from the different halls but I can't recall 21 new cards.
Witty signature comment goes here...
wra
Where?
Xbox Live / Steam
That is pretty sweet.
Sorry, ONE legendary and a few of the neutrals have been revealed.
So yes according to this site, we've only seen 5 of 21 new neutral cards.
http://hearthstone.gamepedia.com/Curse_of_Naxxramas
Witty signature comment goes here...
wra
Inquisitor77: Rius, you are Sisyphus and melee Wizard is your boulder
Tube: This must be what it felt like to be an Iraqi when Saddam was killed
Bookish Stickers - Mrs. Rius' Etsy shop with bumper stickers and vinyl decals.
PSN: Vorpallion Twitch: Vorpallion
Legends of Runeterra: MNCdover #moc
Switch ID: MNC Dover SW-1154-3107-1051
Steam ID
Twitch Page
that's why we call it the struggle, you're supposed to sweat
PSN: Vorpallion Twitch: Vorpallion
Lets see what ya got
Xbox Live / Steam
Done this a few times. Even "wasted" some cards so I wouldn't burn some.
Origin: KafkaAU B-Net: Kafka#1778
I find handlock a hard matchup, but I haven't been playing miracle rogue long, it requires you to draw specific cards much more then other matchups since they'll have taunts out by the time you get rolling
I guess I'll take one. Woo!
However, as expansions add in more cards, and many cards become used for specific tricky decks or simply become less popular due to the increased card pool (or in bane of doom's case, nobody playing it to begin with), non standardized wording could increase the barrier to entry and lead to players being frustrated by misunderstanding multiple ambiguous cards. I understand that one match won't sway people, and that it's easy to learn any individual card, but as large numbers of cards are released and large numbers of new people try large numbers of games, I can see imprecise wording having an aggregate negative effect on the game.
Also also, while Naxx is 30 cards, I believe they've stated they want true expansions (and not single player experiences+cards) to be 100+ cards, which offers more potential for oddness.
Some of the stuff was super confusing for me at first.
For example, the in-game wording for Stealth is "Can't be attacked or targeted until it deals damage." In reality, it's only enemy stuff that can't target it. This totally confused me when my opponent did stuff to his stealthed minions.
I'd probably take the third Flamestrike over most other cards. The fourth I'd honestly have to think about. Would depend on my curve, cause in theory you still need a late game minion or two and that's getting to be a heavy backend.
I'd probably end up taking it, but it'd put me in the tank .
yeah there's a lot of really subtle "this is our first CCG" trip-ups that aren't as obvious as things like "nat pagle is fucking ridiculously good", and bad wording is one of them
It was such a bad start for me.
Edit: I had a game earlier where I was at 28 health when my opponent played Alexstrasza
ice lance mages, giant mages, ice block mages blah
whelp
Time for some Hunter!
maybe the only "bad legendary" i wouldn't dust, just for the style points of burning everything