-
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
Yeah. I've been playing a bit of Maly Rogue lately and I would say it's fine. Loot hoarder or a kobold are ok subs. Obviously not as good as thalnos but it doesn't break the deck or anything to play it without him.
MetroidPrimeRib
Banned
Even if the card fails its still a Yeti. Totally playable.
I really don't understand this. The entire game of Hearthstone is about pulling out a tempo, card, or board advantage against your opponent to grind out the win. The game IS still moving forward, but your chances to win have just decreased drastically.
If thats the case, your deck isn't built to win the control matchup, so its no surprise you'd lose the control matchup. You can't really complain about losing to an archetype you didn't tech against.
It is a necessity, that's how the meta works. A single deck should not be able to do well against every other archetype in the game, that is bad game design.
BananasWithGuns
Member
So is it probably a safe assumption that each class is getting a C'thun card? 9 class cards, 7 neutral.
yeah, the question is if you want to play C'thun druid. In a bubble the card is great. A couple more like this and it could work, like how dragon priest become a thing in TGT even though Blackwing Corrupter was always amazing. I'm just not convinced about C'Thun itself just yet.
LyleLanley
Banned
May god have mercy on your soul.
They all need a replacement for Shredder.
Karsticles
Member
Every deck should be able to do well against every other archetype in the game. That is great design.
These discussions remind me of people saying that counterpicking is good for Street Fighter. It's not. SFV is in a great position right now because every character feels viable against every other character. Even Blizzard recognizes this, which is why Freeze Mage is getting nerfed. The deck is too polarizing in matchups.
I assume so. I wish they would generalize it from C'thun to "Old Ones" to increase deck variation.
MetroidPrimeRib
Banned
That would limit what they could do with the Old Gods.
C'Thun is probably more powerful than any current Dragon though. That mega-blastmage effect is immediately effective in ways that Alex, Nefarian and Ysera are not.
If there really are 16 cards that synergize with C'Thun, we should be able to tech around any real weaknesses - where as the Dragon decks completely rely on synergy and having a dragon in your hand.
4-mana is already pretty full for Druids with Keeper and Savage Combatant. Both of those are probably better cards too.
It's hard to judge how good a C'thun deck will be without seeing the full list of cultists, but my guess is that a Druid C'thun deck won't be as good as other Druid deck archetypes and so this card likely won't see play.
It's hard to judge how good a C'thun deck will be without seeing the full list of cultists, but my guess is that a Druid C'thun deck won't be as good as other Druid deck archetypes and so this card likely won't see play.
Karsticles
Member
The greater concern I have is that all C'thun decks look the same.
Then, in theory, we have ~3 other Old Ones, and they all have support cards that only buff them. Isn't that what we're looking at?
Then it means that you choose an Old One, and your deck kind of looks same-ish in comparison to everyone else who runs that. Plus, a huge portion of the set is now devoted to these copy-deck archetypes.
It might not turn out that way, but that's what my concern is.
Then, in theory, we have ~3 other Old Ones, and they all have support cards that only buff them. Isn't that what we're looking at?
Then it means that you choose an Old One, and your deck kind of looks same-ish in comparison to everyone else who runs that. Plus, a huge portion of the set is now devoted to these copy-deck archetypes.
It might not turn out that way, but that's what my concern is.
Holy shit, when you miracle the fuck out of somebody and steal a win, it feels so good.
Just had a turn 10 where I was able to play malygos, sinister strike, deadly poison x2 and bladeflurry to do 20 damage. With like 2 mana.
I thought I lost when I popped his duplicate on his ethereal conjurer, but the 6/3 was easy to answer every time so he basically just had a hand of like high cost discover a spell cards.
And even with all those spells he left my drake and auctioneer on the board, which let me win as described above.
It's pretty great when the auctioneer lets you cycle and your like: "oh I could cast this, and I could cast this too, and I cast this too! Oh I win."
Just had a turn 10 where I was able to play malygos, sinister strike, deadly poison x2 and bladeflurry to do 20 damage. With like 2 mana.
I thought I lost when I popped his duplicate on his ethereal conjurer, but the 6/3 was easy to answer every time so he basically just had a hand of like high cost discover a spell cards.
And even with all those spells he left my drake and auctioneer on the board, which let me win as described above.
It's pretty great when the auctioneer lets you cycle and your like: "oh I could cast this, and I could cast this too, and I cast this too! Oh I win."
Without combo, no current Druid archetype is good.
Keeper and Savage Combatant are both situational 4 drops. Combatant isn't even really a 4 drop, you want to use your hero power the same turn or else it's almost guaranteed to be worse than a Yeti, let alone a near-best case Twilight Drake.
Shredder is gone and that is the only real 4 drop in ANY Druid list.
No, only C'thun has support cards that buff him. The other Old Gods have their own mechanics.
MetroidPrimeRib
Banned
No, building a deck around it is a C'thun thing only.
Not really.
I would guess C'Thun is the only card that has support cards and the other three are like any other card in the game, in that they have specific interactions with no other card.
Karsticles
Member
Ah, that's good. I was really feeling down about this expansion, and now I have a bit more hope.
I just want some good cheap minions for Hunters.
That a solid card. Its a Yeti if played turn 4, but is some super tanky threat played later on.
I will be so sad if none of them can raise the mana cap.
I will be so sad if none of them can raise the mana cap.
I could post it later when I get home.
Care to elaborate how that is great design? The meta would be incredibly stale if every deck could do well against every other deck. There would be no reason to play anything except the most optimal/easiest class/deck to play, no reason to tech, and no reason to innovate. Currently if a deck rises to the top, counters will surely follow. This is what keeps a meta changing. If you don't understand this, then you don't really understand card game design
It has nothing to do with the polarizing matchups. It is likely getting nerfed because there is very little interaction between players, which is the same reason they nerfed Patron
C'Thun & Cultists are the "Mechs of GvG" of this expansion. They will have a neutral base topped off with the Old God, then a bunch of neutral minions that make a core. Then you have various class flavors for each one. With a couple classes getting good flavor and others getting garbage.
Well, kinda but not really.
There are 16 C'Thun cards and we're thinking 9 of them are class cards. Which means 7 cards in a 30 card deck are going to be C'Thun cards in any given deck.
There will be tons of optimization done, and just like how Reno Lock is the only legit Reno deck, there may only be one legit C'Thun deck - but there will be lots of lists featuring C'Thun with some degree of variety.
16 cards max if you're running doubles (7x2 and 1x2), Though I'd bet that not every card will be usable in every archetype.
A one month fighting game barely could be classified as a balanced game where every character is viable, wait until the mechanics are more exploited to claim that.
The only fighting game where everyone is viable and balanced is yier ar kung fu
Chmpocalypse
Blizzard
This. If the game were so terribly designed as to make every single matchup equally viable... you're just playing Candyland at that point. No challenge means nothing interesting to do in the game.
I'm hoping we see some of the other major tribal synergy, GvG had 40+ mechs. 16 Cultists is nice, but give no where near as many options.
Ben also said that its 16 minions, I'm hoping there are some spells and weapons that also interact with C'thun.
Wait, was it 16 minions that buff C'thun, or interact? Would Klaxxi be one of those 16?
16 C'Thun cards - 9 C'Thun Class cards = 7 Neutral C'Thun cards. So you would have 8 potential cards plus you might double up so you could have up to 16 slots filled with C'Thun cards.
Of course that's probably on the higher side. Reno-C'Thun decks might tap out at 6-7 cards but I think most C'Thun decks will put in 5 pairs of cards or so.
That's cool, it seems like the minions themselves can get buffed by Cthun too so the deck can have minions that are strong when played on board (under certain conditions).
Solid card for the deck though this is a Druid card.
That depends on what your definition of "well" is.
I think having some 6-4 even some 7-3 match ups in a card game are fine (which HS has at the top end with few exceptions) but when you start getting into 8-2 match ups (like Freeze Mage vs CW) then that's bad for the game. You also can't design EVERY SINGLE DECK to have proper match ups against EVERY SINGLE OTHER DECK, that's not feasible in a card game because there's an insanely huge number of deck possibilities (meaning a ton of them are very garbage and you can't balance for that).
This isn't really the same as a fighter where there is huge opportunity cost to playing and mastering a fighter. If you don't design these games around "imbalanced balance" then you will run into the problem of everyone just using a single best deck which does "well" against everything else and thus everyone just plays a single deck.
It's a bit of both actually. Freeze Mage will get nerfed due to high burst damage with no board (cited by John Woo in a podcast), wonky match ups and lack of board interactivity. I can't find the article where they mentioned the match ups part but it certainly was said in the past talking about Freeze Mage (that they want to avoid match ups like that).
LyleLanley
Banned
Don't think I've seen these cards in this thread. From Reddit:
LyleLanley
Banned
Good call.
Aww what was it?
Karsticles
Member
That's like saying everyone would pick Ryu in Street Fighter if the game was balanced. It's just not true. Even if all deck archetypes were balanced, I would be trying to succeed with a Dreadsteed or Explorer's Hat deck because I find those a lot of fun. I love trying to abuse infinite value cards, but it isn't easy.
Card game design isn't special and different from the competitive design of fighting games. If everyone is on roughly the same playing field, people will play what they like, and everyone likes different things. WotC knows this, which is why they acknowledge Timmies and Johnnies. You're imagining a world where everyone is Spike.
I seem to recall someone meeting with Blizzard and saying they didn't want lopsided matchups like Freeze Mage vs. Control Warrior in the game.
Karsticles
Member
Ever heard of chess? Starcraft? DotA? Each of these strategy games are intentionally designed to ensure both sides of the game can make decisions for creative expression, and there are a multitude of ways to ensure the matchup is even.
I'm not saying any deck you could possibly create should be equal to every other. Obviously that is ridiculous. But when you get to entire successful deck archetypes countering other successful deck archetypes, you have a problem.
At the most basic level, balance begins when every card in Hearthstone sees play with some rarity. Nothing is guaranteed dust for everyone, everything has a place. If everyone is off crafting Dr. Boom as soon as they can, the game has a problem.
Kars, please explain to me how one goes about making a card game wherein every permutation of deck is both varied from and equally matched with every other permutation of deck.
Chess is a game of perfect knowledge and equal tools. And even then white still has an advantage. That's a ludicrous comparison.
Chess is a game of perfect knowledge and equal tools. And even then white still has an advantage. That's a ludicrous comparison.
Card design IS different from fighting games and is probably more similar to balance of MOBAs because of the huge amount of variables to account for. MOBAs also use the "imbalance balance" design philosophy.
If a card game like this is "balanced" to where it has 5/5 match ups across the board... then everyone would play the decks that are easiest and fastest to pilot. And that would actually shrink the variety of the game. Why play Handlock when I can get same win percentage as a Face Hunter and win games 4 times faster? It's not efficient.
Also not sure why Timmies were brought up when they aren't really concerned about competitive balance/match ups at the high level. The Timmies of card games will always play their fun decks. It's not like Magic or other card games try to target deck balance to be perfect either... fun decks will always get trampled by competitive decks.
You can say that the MOBAs have drafting/banning but competitive HS also has its own rulesets, usually includes one banning and then required to win with 3 decks. That greatly increases the variability of the games when you need to win with 3 decks versus just 1.
Honestly speaking if the Marvel 3v3 type of fighter was allowed to exist then eventually it too will be balanced like a MOBA too. But that's a topic for another day. Generally speaking, any competitive game where players can formulate their own toolset from a vast amount of tools (like making a team from a bunch of heroes or make a deck from a bunch of cards) tend to have the "imbalance balance" type of design philosophy. This is different from chess, StarCraft or fighters where you are picking from predetermined toolsets.
Now if Hearthstone was played in a way where Blizzard gave you 15 specific decks to play with where the cards were always fixed... sure make that game have balanced match ups across the board.
If a card game like this is "balanced" to where it has 5/5 match ups across the board... then everyone would play the decks that are easiest and fastest to pilot. And that would actually shrink the variety of the game. Why play Handlock when I can get same win percentage as a Face Hunter and win games 4 times faster? It's not efficient.
Also not sure why Timmies were brought up when they aren't really concerned about competitive balance/match ups at the high level. The Timmies of card games will always play their fun decks. It's not like Magic or other card games try to target deck balance to be perfect either... fun decks will always get trampled by competitive decks.
Chess and StarCraft have a relatively low amount of variables to account for compared to DOTA and HS. DOTA also has "imbalance balance" just like every other MOBA. Specific heroes hard counter other heroes. Specific team compositions hard counter other team compositions. It's the nature of the game.
You can say that the MOBAs have drafting/banning but competitive HS also has its own rulesets, usually includes one banning and then required to win with 3 decks. That greatly increases the variability of the games when you need to win with 3 decks versus just 1.
Honestly speaking if the Marvel 3v3 type of fighter was allowed to exist then eventually it too will be balanced like a MOBA too. But that's a topic for another day. Generally speaking, any competitive game where players can formulate their own toolset from a vast amount of tools (like making a team from a bunch of heroes or make a deck from a bunch of cards) tend to have the "imbalance balance" type of design philosophy. This is different from chess, StarCraft or fighters where you are picking from predetermined toolsets.
Now if Hearthstone was played in a way where Blizzard gave you 15 specific decks to play with where the cards were always fixed... sure make that game have balanced match ups across the board.
True enough, though at least they had a few mechs that were good cards on their own ( piloted shredder, annoyatron, sky golem) that weren't only good in mech decks. It sounds like all the cultists will only be played in C'thun decks, a bunch of blastmages.
Your theory makes too many assumptions. To start, different genres do indeed have different design spaces. To think otherwise just indicates you have never actually worked in game design. Second, you assume everyone would play their favorite decks, which is not the case. There will always be those who will eke out whatever advantage they can in competitive play. And third, it is impossible to completely balance separate classes as long as they retain unique cards and hero powers. There will always be a bad match up to your class just based upon the way it functions.
I get that you want to be able to win against everyone with your Hunter, but its never going to happen. You will always have a deck archetype that counters you, because that is exactly why decks are differentiated into different archetypes, each with their own strengths and weaknesses. Its not feasible for a single deck to have no weakness
And if it did exist that deck would be broken and get nerfed anyway because EVERYONE would play it.
Well met!
As expected. The first 4/5 for 4 with (conditional) upside. Druids were always the class that ran Yeti's back in the day so this will definitely see play. Excited to see what the other classes get for their C'thun card and what the subthemes are going to be for the other gods.
edit: I do really like the flavour of the Giant Sandworm. The ability works really well with the card, this worm that keeps popping up from the sand and killing minions.
edit: I do really like the flavour of the Giant Sandworm. The ability works really well with the card, this worm that keeps popping up from the sand and killing minions.