You only really want the seven Murlocs that can either charge or buff charged minions.
2 x Bluegill (charge)
1 x Old Murk-Eye (charge)
2 x Murloc Warleader (buff)
2 x Grimscale Oracle (buff)
Anything else is basically wasted on Anyfin.
-
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 |OT5| Corrupted Deeprock Salt
- Thread starter ZealousD
- Start date
You only really want the seven Murlocs that can either charge or buff charged minions.
2 x Bluegill (charge)
1 x Old Murk-Eye (charge)
2 x Murloc Warleader (buff)
2 x Grimscale Oracle (buff)
Anything else is basically wasted on Anyfin.
whenever I play against reno lock they always have 3 aoe in their first 8 turns... fml
irfaanator
Banned
the feels when you lose turn 4 against a murloc paladin b/c of their insane draw
New Designer Insight with Ben Brode (basic cards): https://vid.me/PVw9
Mobius and pet octopus
Member
Pretty much reflects what myself and others have been saying about power creep over bad cards.
Power creep is when the overall strength of a deck/meta is increased. Cards that aren't played that have better versions printed aren't power creep because they are better than old cards, but only if they increase the overall strength of decks in the meta.
Dr. boom is not power creep because war golem wasn't played, but because it increased the overall power of decks in the meta.
Ice rager is not power creep because it isn't even played, let alone the fact that magma was never played as well.
To reiterate, they view power creep as increasing the power "curve" of the meta.
The reason cards like magma rager exist is a learning tool for new players. They help teach new players what bad cards are. And when you replace them it feels like a form of progression, which is emotionally satisfying. Basic cards fill a lot of different roles, especially as a teaching tool and this idea of progression, so they don't like to alter them at all and designed them to be very simple.
There is more to the video but that is some (most?) of the highlights.
RumblingRosco
Member
I agree. It is up to like 1.4 GB right? My 16 GB phone only has a bit over 13 GB useable, so as of now my phone is more than 10% a Hearthstone device. A few more patches and I'll probably have to just uninstall it. This is my punishment for being on a cheap 3-year old phone.
By the way, any one have a decklist for a modern Priest deck? I am still running a non-Dragon Control Priest which is fine, but I'm wondering if it isn't time to update.
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?
what is that site?
Mirror site.
Someone rehosted the video there before Blizzard took it down from Youtube.
Professor Lich
Member
Any idea why it was taken down?
Probably the same reason the patch contained 3 months of content. They're prepping for the holidays and want this stuff ready. Video is set to private now.
Professor Lich
Member
Ahh, makes sense. Thanks for bringing the mirror then.
I don't really understand the video. Do they just not want people to use the term "power creep" in a different way than it's used internally? War Golem is used as a point of comparison against Dr. Boom as a jumping off point or an exaggeration, but obviously these kind of complaints should be interpreted as: "Dr. Boom is so powerful that it is ubiquitous across a range of decks that often have nothing in common with one another." These kind of power creeps often create a new level that few cards stand on the level of, if it is even more than one card.
And the whole...bad cards existing to train players about bad cards...what? So is the intention of stuff like TGT and the implementation of mechanics like Joust to create a bunch more new bad cards? Does the game need a regular influx of bad cards?
And the whole...bad cards existing to train players about bad cards...what? So is the intention of stuff like TGT and the implementation of mechanics like Joust to create a bunch more new bad cards? Does the game need a regular influx of bad cards?
BreezyLimbo
Banned
It's only a few cards at first, but all cards that will to be created after will be measured against that card. It's less obvious with Boom as there are few 7 drops and 7's were weak before it, but think of Piloted Shredder. It was the top 4 drop when it came out, not accounting for specific synergies. Now, every time Blizzard makes a 4 drop, people are going to ask themselves if it's worth running over Piloted Shredder. In order to keep the game fresh, Blizzard has to release cards that are worth playing for one reason or another. That means that new 4 drops need to be near the level of a shredder, or better in certain circumstances. This means that one card has in effect, increased the baseline expectation for 4 drops. That is power creep.
For cards like Ice Rager, this doesn't happen because both it and Magma Rager are still shit. Neither card sees play, and neither one is in any danger of raising expectations and affecting overall power level. It only appears like power creep to people because the easy, lazy, profiteering way of creating expansions is to just release a bunch of similar cards to what's currently played, but better. If they didn't care about power creep, they could release 5/4 shredders, a 3/2 neutral mini-bot, or a 1 mana 2/2 Mad Scientist. People would play those, and it would raise expectations for card power going forward. People aren't going to play Ice Rager.
If anything, Joust is an example of what can go wrong when you avoid power creep. The goal of any release is to create cards people want to own and play. To do so, they either need to replace something you already use (power creep), or they need to be something different. Blizzard's answer to power creep seems to be introducing new mechanics with each release. And they're generally going to try to match the power level of existing decks, not really beat them, because that would be power creep. But when you do that, you run the risk of a mechanic being a flop, which is what happened to Joust.
This is different than the argument being made in the video, which deals with bad basic cards. The idea is that progression is essential for new players. To stick with the game, they need to feel like they're getting stronger and better at it. One way is to have a few cards that have strictly better versions outside of the basic set. It's a trick since those cards are still crap, but a new player doesn't necessarily know that. They could get Ice Rager in a pack and think they have a stronger collection because it's obviously better than their old Magma Rager. And it's not something I noticed until he made this argument, but Ice Rager and Heckler are commons. It doesn't really fit any nefarious plan for making people get new cards because they're freaking commons and they're still bad. But it does affect the new player experience because they're going to have mostly commons at first.
I was not a fan of cards like Ice Rager, not because they were power creep, but because it seemed like lazy padding. But I like Brode's explanation and reasoning for it, and I don't see a problem with them burning a few common slots on tricking new players.
I will never do that daily. I get my 1 win a week and I'm out. There's yet to be a brawl that I really enjoy.
Could have been a worse brawl to get that quest on. Like fucking spiders...
My secret paladin doesn't make it to the secrets, lost on turn five to shaman, lost before to murloc paladin.
The brawl itself isn't that bad but matches take like 20 fucking minutes and can completely around on every turn
I mean...I don't feel that some level of power creep is inherently undesirable. The real issue pops up with how it introduces itself into the game. There are clear outliers that stand above the power point of other cards. This creates a very small toolset for competitive players to work with, and tends to thwart players that do not have access to specific cards. These unusually powerful cards render most other shared mana cost cards largely irrelevant, and further complicate things by going so far as to step on the toes of higher mana cost slots. Dr. Boom didn't just crowd out the 7 drop spot, but it started to often replace cards in the 8+ range as well. Blizzard's complete aversion to nerfing these outliers leads to situations where the only path forward is to create new baselines around these overpowered cards. Unfortunately they have also come to a certain standard that tries to avoid changing cards at all costs, and you wind up with a scenario where they have to show a certain trepidation about introducing new cards and mechanics because they cannot retroactively balance them. In this sense, Blizzard's design philosophies seem set up to progressively ruin the game.
I also think the lousy common card stuff is a load of garbage. The game has become increasingly prohibitive to new players because low cost decks seem to be the only ones actively targeted for nerfs. What is the philosophy around the dozens and dozens of cards at rare or above that don't see play? Is Skeleton Knight supposed to bait players? How do these unlockable cards being bad teach players anything beyond punishing them for opening packs with the garbage cards instead of the useful ones? Players can't experiment with something like a Sea Reaver, or design a whole deck around Bolster because there's no way to test these things without sinking massive amounts of limited resources into obtaining these cards. What is the goal behind stuff like Pirate Rogue being pretty awful even as they introduce new cards clearly set up to push players to make those sorts of decks?
The "power creep" conversation is so tired by now. In any case, I don't think anyone ever really had a problem with Ice Rager or Evil Heckler for the way they affected decks or games, more like they believed Blizzard's design philosophy behind them is faulty, especially the part when they don't go back and fix old cards and instead make new ones, but they sure have no problem murdering cards like Warsong or Buzzard (and never in a timely fashion, which is all the more baffling). Having teaching tools is fine and all. Surely if they were concerned about teaching new players they'd have better things to offer in addition to: look, these 2 cards are similar but this has 1 more health or costs 1 less so that means it's better. Wow you're so good at this game kid! The tutorials suck ass for example. This last Brawl is great, but if more deck slots is too confusing for some players, this must feel like string theory to them.
Anyways, someone mentioned the term "power creep" and by some definition someone invented for the term (which existed before this game) it is being used wrong, so everyone who questions Blizzard behind the design of some cards that have been called "power creep" by someone else surely must be wrong too. We got it. Blizzard does no wrong. Case closed and move on from all this power creep nonsense please.
Anyways, someone mentioned the term "power creep" and by some definition someone invented for the term (which existed before this game) it is being used wrong, so everyone who questions Blizzard behind the design of some cards that have been called "power creep" by someone else surely must be wrong too. We got it. Blizzard does no wrong. Case closed and move on from all this power creep nonsense please.
Hmm, I like the idea of this brawl. It's kinda like playing the card game "Dominion", which is actually cool as hell. Unlike dominion, however, here your deck shuffles at the end of every turn so RNG becomes a massive factor.
I wonder how different it would play if your deck kept a static order, and anything you played or returned to the deck from your hand went to the bottom in a random order instead of getting shuffled back in with everything. It would add a little more consistency and you could actually guess/plan for what was coming next.
Overall a cool idea. Games take forever though, and that's if you don't get blown out by a turn 2 four drop that takes over the early game.
I wonder how different it would play if your deck kept a static order, and anything you played or returned to the deck from your hand went to the bottom in a random order instead of getting shuffled back in with everything. It would add a little more consistency and you could actually guess/plan for what was coming next.
Overall a cool idea. Games take forever though, and that's if you don't get blown out by a turn 2 four drop that takes over the early game.
Brode didn't say that power creep as a concept doesn't exist or isn't in Hearthstone. Only that Ice Rager and Evil Heckler are not good examples of it. He admitted Dr. Boom was absolutely power creep.
Blizzard absolutely can and has done wrong. Mad Scientist, Piloted Shredder, Dr. Boom, and Mysterious Challenger are all cards that Blizzard went too far with. Unearthed Raptor isn't breaking the meta right now but it absolutely could in the future. That card will just get stronger and stronger as Rogue gets better and better on-curve minions. Ben Brode has never really addressed the power level of these cards in a meaningful way. Blizzard keeps denying that Dr. Boom is too powerful even though he is an auto-include in pretty much every midrange and control deck. Blizzard hasn't really even talked about Piloted Shredder. They handwave away the insane power level of Mad Scientist and Mysterious Challenger as being fine because they like "build arounds" and really want to push secret play for some reason.
Really, it's these cards that people should be complaining about. These cards are the true power creep. Ice Rager and Evil Heckler aren't really doing anything.
Boom is an interesting case. I agree with you that there are cases where power creep can be good, and the situation I'm thinking of is a hole in the original lineup. 7 drops sucked before Boom. It needed a boost to get to a proper power level between 6 drops and 8 drops. Boom was helpful in that sense, but he just went too far as you suggested. He raised the bar not only for 7 drops, but 8 drops as you still ask the question "Is this better than Boom" and for a lot of 8 drops the answer is still no.
Yeah, an aversion to nerfing is problematic for avoiding power creep because they can't fix mistakes. Another part of it that I think is going to hurt them is the focus on minion trading as the correct way to play, and not embracing other styles of play (see explanation of most of the nerfs they have done). If they want to avoid power creep and create playable cards, they need interesting, different cards, and avoiding entire styles of play just seems to cut out possibilities. This is probably my primary concern with the game going forward. Without other styles of play, it just feels like this game is moving towards this hyper-efficient tempo game with decks full of sticky, high-value minions. And as that happens, power creep becomes harder to control.
Well, lousy cards are hard to avoid in card games as power is relative, and can be affected by synergies. How many decks ran Secretkeeper before TGT? Also, with cards that summon other cards, they may need to balance groups of cards to keep that card balanced. And I agree that Skeleton Knight probably isn't in there as a teaching tool, and I haven't heard a reason from Blizzard about that card. I could see it being something like the new player trick, but in reverse. Bad legendaries can make good ones look better. If we were to eliminate all bad cards from the game, would it make the good cards seem less good? That's just me guessing, I don't think Blizzard has commented specifically on bad legendaries.
That sounds like a reason to buy some card packs if you want to experiment with something you might want to play on ladder. That's not meant to be a joke, Blizzard does want people to buy packs, and the flexibility of trying out all of the new possibilities is not something they're going to give away easily. Generally, the common cards that new players are going to get rely less on these synergies for decent value. Those two points actually work together as making more of those cards rare/epic/legendary keeps them out of the hands of new players who can't use them, and they keep the experimentation cost high enough to get other players to pay up if they want to try. Of course, if you don't want to experiment, someone else will, and if it does it'll eventually become another netdeck which can be copied without the risk of failure.
Yes, Bolster is a common, but I think we can all agree the Bolster rarity was a mistake at this point.
I wasn't clear but I didn't mean Ben Brode said this or that, didn't mean to imply it doesn't exist either, I meant some people in here that would rather argue what the term really means instead of the cards themselves.
I was being sarcastic about that
Which has been my point all along! Ages I've been talking about Mad Scientist, we all know about Doom, and MC, and we've said lots about Piloted Shredder and its effect on decks and how it kills other 4 drops, etc.
But I don't buy the "you should be complaining about this but not that" argument. We do. Constantly. We can talk about many things at different times and that doesn't mean we care about them to the same degree. And the conversation about Ice Rager and Evil Heckler was never about the cards, again, it was about a design decision that will likely happen again, that could be better or it could be different, or if they don't really do anything then why the hell is it happening in the first place? An example again how they are included in the same conversation as Dr. Boom, the most powerful neutral card in the game when that was never the point.
But like I said, it's tiring talking about them because then everyone paints the discussion as "power creep this, power creep that" and it goes nowhere.
BananasWithGuns
Member
Regardless of what the next expansion is, I really hope Shaman finally gets a class dragon from it.
Mobius and pet octopus
Member
There is no clear definition. It is a concept that differs from person to person. And they're explaining their design philosophy so it only makes sense that they explain their view of power creep. It really has nothing to do with being right or wrong, it is their explanation that you can agree with or disagree with.
It also happens to be the only one that makes sense.
quackamole
Member
Just fought a mage who unstable portaled into turn turn 6 Nefarian, who gave him an enter the coliseum to clear my board. Yup I don't know why I play this bullshit game sometimes.
WesternHeretic
Member
Because 3 games from now your RNG is going to be so bull shit some poor dude gonna be spilling salt from his eyes.
It works both ways man....
quackamole
Member
I mean it's a bad thing, either way? RNG shouldn't swing so damn hard that make games one sided. How about balance it out so it's more fair and even for both sides? You think a game is fun when it's curb stomp every other game?
That's a class minion so it doesn't count as class minions are supposed to be better. Might as well say that the Warrior 7 drop is a better War Golem.
Fierce Monkey is already a wink and a nod to Silverback Patriarch, as it is also a monkey/beast. The beast tag is pointless for warrior so it can't be anything other than a wink and a nod. So it would be a bit weird for there to be another wink and a nod to Silverback Patriarch. Kind of beating a dead horse at that point. Yes. Silverback Patriarch is garbage. We get it.
That isn't to say there shouldn't be a 3 mana 2/4 taunt in the game. Just that making it a beast is a bit overkill. That was my point.
toddhunter
Member
In my eyes the decks are CW/ramp druid for obvious reasons. They can fit the card and drop big shit.
You can also try to setup malygos into pyroblast. Or double blast to the face.
Turn 8 vs. a Priest with me at 10 hp, I twisting nether and drop a molten giant. He plays boom. I trade into his boom and play my own. He runs the two bots in and lightbombs, both hit for 4 and I die to exact lethal. I was going to Jaraxxus and grind him down the next turn.
Dr. Boom, once again, made me stop playing hearthstone for the day because it's a nonsense pile of shit.
Dr. Boom, once again, made me stop playing hearthstone for the day because it's a nonsense pile of shit.
poppedcollar69
Member
first game with finley
Professor Lich
Member
That's the deck I'm running around with, and I guess it kind of works. It's probably more midrange-y / control-y than it should be though, but I'm not really a fan of over aggressive decks.
first game with finley
rogue without daggers? madness.
MetroidPrimeRib
Banned
first game with finley
How exactly does that work? Are you just mashing face with no oil or blade flurry?