-
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 |OT4| The warsong has ended, please patron other decks
- Thread starter ZealousD
- Start date
- Status
Sokka
Member
Add me to the chat room, my name is: CybitZ
Magic has reached a point (a long time ago actually) where the Graveyard is effectively a second deck. Kind of like if Priest's Ressurect was a standard effect on all kinds of cards. This is another reason why mill rarely works. People can be very happy to see you put cards in their Graveyard.
FeD_nL, thanks!
Never played Magic, but I did play Yu Gi Oh
(20 years ago)
I don't actually think its the case that card games steal from magic intentionally. Its more of a 'simpsons did it' kind of situation where for every original idea you think you have while developing a card game... magic did it.
Maliceisgdlk
Alll of this talk about terms and value reminds me...
It may be Hearthstone 101 but are there any good articles/videos about when to do seemingly bad trades (not the old ones before a lot of the current cards)?
For example it can be a good idea to clear a priests board before they can turn that innocuous card into a monster. Or maybe if you sense a board clear/big spell coming up and it's better to sacrifice minions on your own terms?
Both in constructed and arena as it differs slightly, ie in arena when should you take a chance and hope they're missing/haven't drawn an important card that would be standard on the ladder?
It may be Hearthstone 101 but are there any good articles/videos about when to do seemingly bad trades (not the old ones before a lot of the current cards)?
For example it can be a good idea to clear a priests board before they can turn that innocuous card into a monster. Or maybe if you sense a board clear/big spell coming up and it's better to sacrifice minions on your own terms?
Both in constructed and arena as it differs slightly, ie in arena when should you take a chance and hope they're missing/haven't drawn an important card that would be standard on the ladder?
Sure, that sounds plausible. I wouldn't think it a negative if they did either, especially with a game that grew so much by itself.
Beyond this, a lot of the popular deck names come from Magic as well.
Ramp Druid is a reference to Rampant Growth, the Magic card most similar to Wild Growth.
Zoolock is derived from Magic Zoo decks that got that name because the cards they used were overwhelmingly animals (as opposed to say humans, elves, or machines).
Mill decks are named after Millstone, a card that caused a player to put the top two cards of their library into their graveyard when used.
Phawx
Member
Actually sometimes I don't mind this. I am curious what other cards they had. But if they just going to wait until the rope before finishing it, then yea.
I find Resurrect's existing interesting just because of this. I believe that's the first card that shows hearthstone does actually track a 'graveyard' of sorts, though I can't imagine them expanding upon it all that much.
A. Did the cost of your card provide you with huge potential pay-off, versus having to combo/chain more than a single card? You save on mana and cards by playing them. We shall call that the "Value Meal"
B. Opposite to that, cards that are cheap to cast, effective at their job (whatever that job may be). They don't provide the same amount as the Value Meals, but sometimes they're just as good. Those are called the "Dollar Menus"
C. Having a card that will provide you with extraordinary tempo, but the conditions must either be met or you give up a certain something, whether health or even more cards. You can call them "Free Refills".
D. Casting a card you know will net you a nice balance of draw/advantage and tempo? "Happy Hour", only reliable between the midrange of 2-5 mana, but the cost is perfect.
E. Wanna go fast? Wanna fill up your board presence as fast as you can, never stopping, never caring about your opponent's own mana pool, health pool, or card pool? Well, we call that the "Drive Thru".
F. Powerful cards with amazing effects... but good luck playing them anytime soon. You may only ever want one of these in your deck. Welcome to the "Late Night Menu"
G. You decided to put Goldshire Footman and Magma Rager and your Golden Hemet Nesingwary legendary in your deck because it was your first. "Kids' Meal".
Haunted
Member
crazygambit
Member
This is a definition I can get behind.
I will use every tool at my disposal, even bluffing and emotes. I will sometimes make plays to represent I have one secret when I really have another.
One time he was at 13 health and I had 12 damage on my turn so I simply said "Well Played" played Unleashed the Hounds and began attacking face somewhat slowly, he conceded before I was done.
Except for Fel Reaver though, burned cards don't count. Or cards that add copies to your deck. Card advantage is about the cards you draw IMO, even if you don't get to play them.
Nothing, because it depends. You have to also look at the state of the boards. Say we both have 3 cards in hand and 1 minion on board. I play a minion that returns you minion to your hand. Now you have 4 cards and I have 2, but you haven't really gotten any card advantage out of that play, you've just lost tempo.
This is the best post made on today's discussion for sure. I wish mine had been as clear and correct as yours.
I strongly disagree with slayn's analysis because it lacks specificity. Reducing the entire spectrum of strategies to three terms significantly reduces our abillty to discuss these topics.
We need different labels for these two things, for instance:
1) Playing Ysera and having the opponent require 2 cards to remove her
2) Drawing 4 cards with sprint
Using slayn's terminology, these both represent "card advantage," but they are very different means by which to produce them and should have different labels to describe their mechanism and deck design.
Nothing? The concept needs a label, because we want to describe the concept in question. What label would you give it?
We need different labels for these two things, for instance:
1) Playing Ysera and having the opponent require 2 cards to remove her
2) Drawing 4 cards with sprint
Using slayn's terminology, these both represent "card advantage," but they are very different means by which to produce them and should have different labels to describe their mechanism and deck design.
Nothing? The concept needs a label, because we want to describe the concept in question. What label would you give it?
Card Advantage will always refers to the number of cards in hand, or the number of options you have during a play.
Counting the number of things you played and the number of cards remaining in your deck are not nearly as important as what is in your hand and what is on the board.
Your example is also an example of giving your opponent card advantage in exchange for a big tempo advantage.
I like slayn's analysis, but I also agree that it lacks specificity. Still, learning about the important resources and how they interact is hugely important, and is basic theory that still isn't widely understood nearly well enough. It is a different discussion than what you're interested in, but his post is the building blocks for the discussion you want, and needs to be widely understood before we can distinguish between different kinds of card advantage, tempo, life loss, etc.
Yes, that's fine. I don't disagree with that it's a good bird's eye view; it's just not the discussion I'm having!
Slayn was straight up pointing out the mechanics within the game. If you want to apply additional labels onto things then that's fine, but it doesn't make Slayn wrong.
I don't think we need to come up with a label for Ysera. As long as you understand the basic terms you can communicate what the card does.
Sprint and cards like it are known as cycle or card draw. They allow you to increase your card advantage.
Ysera is too complicated for a label.
Ysera increases your board presence. (Gains tempo)
Ysera then draws you a card. (Increases Card Advantage)
Option 1) Your opponent must then spend cards to remove the threat (Widening the difference in number of cards)
Option 2) Your opponent ignores Ysera and floods the board. They now have much more Tempo and you have Card Advantage.
Edit:
What terms do we need to define? I'll even put together the glossary.
Phawx
Member
1.) Lure
2.) (if we are going to call # cards in hand "card advantage" we can call this deck advantage)
crazygambit
Member
No it isn't. That was the whole point. He's not getting an extra card. If we assume non battlecry minions, he's most definitely not getting card advantage from that play alone. He could have used that minion already to trade for one and after playing him again, could maybe trade for 2 more. That play would give him card advantage, but not just the fact that it was returned to his hand.
With battlecries it could get murky, because some battlecries actually generate cards.
Edit: To clarify just having more cards in your hand than your opponent doesn't equate to card advantage. If you're playing against Face Hunter and he dumps his entire hand on the board and you've played nothing by turn 5 (and haven't killed any of his cards) you'll certainly have more cards in your hand, but you've both drawn the same exact number, so neither has card advantage and you're behind in tempo. If at T6 you cast a board clear that takes out 4 of his minions with 1 card, NOW you have card advantage, but will probably end up losing anyway because you're so behind in tempo and life.
Phawx
Member
I disagree. Ysera is the same a Leper Gnome and Emperor Thaurissan. They may as well be taunt cards.
Edit: They are threats. How bout the label, Threaten
p_Red
because nothing exists in a vacuum. in that case he does have minor "Card advantage", but the lost tempo vastly outweighs the advantage.
similar to how if you have tempo (major board advantage) but are at the point of top decking (horrible card advantage) the latter will greatly outweigh the former.
I think calling out 3 basic resources is fine, but you can't forsake one resource over the other one or two.
MetroidPrimeRib
Banned
Cards like that are sometimes called pseudo-taunts because you pretty much need to kill them fast to win. Best examples are probably Thaurissan and Kel'thuzad because if they stay alive past the first turn your chances of winning drop dramatically depending on how full the hand/how full the board is
Phawx
Member
Yea
Alarm-o-bot
Leper Gnome
Emperor
Ysera
Rag
Ancient Watcher
I am fine with pseudo-taunt, but threaten is without a hyphen xD
crazygambit
Member
I clarified a bit in my edit above, but no, he most definitely doesn't get card advantage in that situation.
If your opponent plays his cards and you just sit on your hand, having more cards than him doesn't mean you've gained card advantage. You've both drawn the same amount of cards.
Having more cards on your hand on its own doesn't tell you anything.
BlackBuzzard
Banned
Trump go home you are drunk.
Super Nothing
Member
Drawing off of Sprint is just card advantage. Maybe call Ysera a card sponge since she soaks up the other player's cards, or call the act of causing the other player to use at least 2 cards to remove one of yours card aborption (although most people just refer to this as "value"). But you're still creating card advantage by going 2 for 1 (and also adding a card to your hand, so probably at least 3 for 2). But there aren't many cards that can take that much damage and are immune to BGH (Malygos is the only other one I can think of). Even then, she can still be removed with a single card (Polymorph, Hex, Assassinate, Shield Slam, Mind Control, etc). That doesn't answer the dream card she created in the turn she was active, but that aspect of Ysera would strictly be card advantage.
BlackBuzzard
Banned
What the hell was Trump thinking with that play
Ye wtf kinda rank 20 play was that. He just threw that game.
Servbot #42
Unconfirmed Member
What the hell was Trump thinking with that play
You guys are just too dense the understand the genius behind Trump's plays...........
We aren't inventing a new term. This is an existing term in card games.
From the wiki, "The basic concept of card advantage is one player having more cards in hand and/or in play than their opponent."
This means that:
- Number of cards in hand vs opponent
- Number of cards in play vs opponent
- Both
I think that since in Hearthstone Tempo is usually used to express the Power of cards in play vs an opponent, that Card Advantage only needs to represent the Number of cards in Hand.
So which way should we define Card Advantage?
BlackBuzzard
Banned
I feel so bad for Kibler and Dog to be on a team with Trump. With these kind of plays he should be in team Celestial.
Minsc
Gold Member
I really hope we get more deck slots with the expansion (or shortly after). It's so annoying to have to deal with ranked meta and have to tear down fun decks to have to create other ones to play on the ladder for the moment.
I just can't believe there's only 9 decks slots and 9 classes. Who is the genius who figured that was plenty? All these different viable decks and you can't store any of them. You could easily have 100 decks across the 9 classes (various flavors of control/aggro/fun for each class) and still use them all up.
I just can't believe there's only 9 decks slots and 9 classes. Who is the genius who figured that was plenty? All these different viable decks and you can't store any of them. You could easily have 100 decks across the 9 classes (various flavors of control/aggro/fun for each class) and still use them all up.
Phawx
Member
The very first sentence of that link says:
"Card advantage (often abbreviated CA) is a term used in collectible card game strategy to indicate one player having access to more cards than another player, usually by drawing more cards through in-game effects"
The next sentence clarifies that drawing cards gives CA. So having less cards in your deck is CA.
It will most likely be pay for new slots. Which I'm fine with.
I understand, but what slayn is discussing is important for anyone wanting to participate in your discussion to understand and agree on, and I'm not sure that was happening.
Trump's plays make sense in hindsight because he thought it was Molten Echo, and wasn't playing around Blizzard.
- Status