Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Closed beta has begun


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
135 replies to this topic

#21 Pisshands

Pisshands

    A.K.A. Mr. Classy

  • • Guide Author
  • 187 posts

Posted 18 August 2013 - 06:23 AM

Well, clearly a 1-turn enhancement and a permanent enhancement of the exact same potency shouldn't have identical mana costs. That's massively problematic, and one of four changes should be made: Rockbiter mana cost dropped to zero, Rockbiter potency increased to 5, Blessing of Might potency dropped to 1 or 2, Blessing of Might cost increased to 3-4 mana.

#22 Moshne

Moshne

    Soda Popinski

  •  Patrons
  • 2,656 posts

Posted 18 August 2013 - 06:40 AM

All of those solutions have major problems:

1. Almost nothing should ever be free. That is a big no-no and rule #1 of a cost based CCG.
2. 5 damage Rockbiter would result is some hilarious blowouts with Windfury. Especially considering you can cast it on Thrall himself with Doomhammer. That is extremely overpowered.

#3 and 4 are potentially promising. I'm not sure without playing more the negative ramifications of either option, but #1 and #2 are game busting.

- 13/13 HM -25m - W/Th/Sun 8-12 CST LF Mistweaver
www.somethingwickedguild.com


#23 Pisshands

Pisshands

    A.K.A. Mr. Classy

  • • Guide Author
  • 187 posts

Posted 18 August 2013 - 06:58 AM

I agree that the problem is with Blessing of Might more than Rockbiter.

After losing several games in a row to a player running a similar deck in a complete blowout fashion, I find the problem I have with this is that the size of the starting hand is so damn small that the RNG on the opening draw is overwhelmingly high. Earlier I drew double Bloodlust and shuffled one back into the deck just to receive a Windfury in its place and then draw it again on round 2. My opponent had a quick deck that came up just right, and I ended the game with four unused enhancements in hand because I could never get a single unit on the ground for more than a round. But if I had, boy, yeah...

The biggest problem with this game, far and away, in 100 point font, is that the human players on the other side of a computer spend far too long figuring out what to do each turn. A timer and a "Hurry up!" vocal command need to be implemented ASAP.

#24 MysticalOS

MysticalOS

    French Hacker

  • ♦ Administrators
  • 961 posts
  • LocationGeorgia

Posted 18 August 2013 - 06:59 AM

Yeah i hate starting with no 1s or 2s. It seems if you don't get SOMETHING on opener you at gross disadvantage. At same time, not sure you want to shove a deck full of 1s and 2s and be weak handed later game.

#25 Pisshands

Pisshands

    A.K.A. Mr. Classy

  • • Guide Author
  • 187 posts

Posted 18 August 2013 - 07:21 AM

Yeah i hate starting with no 1s or 2s. It seems if you don't get SOMETHING on opener you at gross disadvantage. At same time, not sure you want to shove a deck full of 1s and 2s and be weak handed later game.


I don't know, the game is just unforgivingly RNG sometimes. Case in point the game I'm playing now. I drew Hex, Rockbiter and Ancestral Healing. I put RB and AH back in the deck and drew Windfury and Totemic Might. I drew AH on my first draw, a Stormwind Champion (7 mana) on my second, then a second AH and TM on my third and fourth. Absolutely unforgiving, and it stems largely from the undersized starting hand.

#26 MysticalOS

MysticalOS

    French Hacker

  • ♦ Administrators
  • 961 posts
  • LocationGeorgia

Posted 18 August 2013 - 07:23 AM

Well it's a beta, must be sure to leave feedback on the blizz forums. I think for that specific problem maybe some kind of protection that makes at least one 1 mana card spawn in your starting hand or something along those lines.

#27 Hamlet

Hamlet

    Mike Tyson

  • • Guide Author
  • 11,567 posts

Posted 18 August 2013 - 08:14 AM

Maybe you guys are right and I'm underestimating BoM. Regardless, I'm not certain--creature enchantments have a lot of inherent downside. I couldn't see more than 2 for it.

I'm not inherently offensive that one appears strictly better than the other. They're for different classes, no different from two Magic card for different colors being costed differently as a natural part of the color pie. And maybe Rockbiter's just a bad card, or potentially, and otherwise bad card that's justifiable by Shaman combo potential.

I'm definitely opposed to messing with the natural RNG of card draw. It's a huge can of worms. We've dealt with mana screw for 19 years, we can handle a little variation in a more casual game with a lot of other mitigating factors (smaller deck size, no colors).

#28 Astrylian

Astrylian

    Rawr

  • Members
  • 3,604 posts

Posted 18 August 2013 - 10:53 AM

A) Nothing is ever truly free, because even at 0 mana, it costs a card.
B) You can't compare single cards cross-class, like Blessing of Might vs Rockbiter Weapon. Yes, just looking at those two makes it seem like BoM is way better than Rockbiter. However, also involved is what it can combo with. Rockbiter can combo with Windfury, for example, Blessing of Might cannot. Different classes have different abilities that are unique to that class, and taking advantage of them is important (otherwise, why play that class?).
Rawr!

#29 malthrin

malthrin

    stalemate associate

  • Moderators
  • 9,107 posts

Posted 18 August 2013 - 03:40 PM

FYI: if you draw all the cards in your deck, each subsequent attempt to draw will deal you an increasing amount of damage: 1, 2, 3, etc.

May have gone a little overboard in that game.
Lampkin in EJBSG 28 | Anders in EJBSG 24 | Cavil in EJBSG 20
Boomer in EJBSG 19 | Roslin in EJBSG 17 | Roslin in EJBSG 13 | Roslin in EJBSG 8
MTG Online draft viewer

#30 Moshne

Moshne

    Soda Popinski

  •  Patrons
  • 2,656 posts

Posted 18 August 2013 - 03:58 PM

I realize they aren't free in that they cost a card. Everything I've said is colored by experience with Magic, where free has been a ticket to broken almost everytime.

Also paladins have access to Windfury via tons of neutral creatures. Perhaps that is the inherent problem. BoM for 1 vs Rockbiter for 1 isn't as offensive if the Paladin isn't able to have half a dozen WF creatures too.

- 13/13 HM -25m - W/Th/Sun 8-12 CST LF Mistweaver
www.somethingwickedguild.com


#31 Hamlet

Hamlet

    Mike Tyson

  • • Guide Author
  • 11,567 posts

Posted 18 August 2013 - 04:17 PM

2 can give you much better creature enchantments like Mark of the Wild (still not really an amazing card) and probably others I don't remember off the top of my head. I don't think BoM would be strong at 2. It's entirely possible to me that 1 is right for BoM and either 0 or 1 for Rockbiter. You've pointed out how driven by card advantage this game is (don't you wind up playing off your deck in a large portion of games?), and those 0-cost spells tend to be pretty bad in that context. Maybe later we'll see what this game's version of aggro looks like and whether 3 damage for 0 and a card adds too much to it, but I'm not totally convinced.

#32 Moshne

Moshne

    Soda Popinski

  •  Patrons
  • 2,656 posts

Posted 18 August 2013 - 06:57 PM

Rockbiter could probably be 0, overload 1. Would help the synergy with the overload Elemental as well to up the power on it a tad relatively to BoM. I don't know that BoM needs a price increase but maybe should just be +2 permanently for 1.

I really don't find myself out of cards frequently, but I load up on card draw. Acolytes of pain, blessing of wisdom etc. are all pretty great. I might be running too much as I often win with cards in hand still.

- 13/13 HM -25m - W/Th/Sun 8-12 CST LF Mistweaver
www.somethingwickedguild.com


#33 Pisshands

Pisshands

    A.K.A. Mr. Classy

  • • Guide Author
  • 187 posts

Posted 18 August 2013 - 07:26 PM

I realize they aren't free in that they cost a card. Everything I've said is colored by experience with Magic, where free has been a ticket to broken almost everytime.

Also paladins have access to Windfury via tons of neutral creatures. Perhaps that is the inherent problem. BoM for 1 vs Rockbiter for 1 isn't as offensive if the Paladin isn't able to have half a dozen WF creatures too.


I am definitely inclined to say Windfury shouldn't be on a single Neutral mob. I've spent some time ruminating on classes, and I feel that counter-class play isn't really an issue, but your class definitely does affect your spell pool, which means that while classes don't specifically counter other classes, they do counter specific build styles. For example, Warlock has a lot of AoE minion damage, which means it beats down on wide decks full of enhancement minions (Raid Leader, et. al.) pretty hard, Mage is extremely effective at taking out more tall decks, such as a Druid's 8/8 Taunt treants, Warrior has a mixture of minion cleave and direct minion assassination (Execute is 1 mana, this feels low to me for an instant kill on what should always be an important, large minion).

Again, my knowledge of MTG and CCG's in general is limited, although I have reinstalled Duels of the Planeswalkers just to remember card names, and a White deck combining Captain's Call, Crusader of Odric, Geist-Honored Monk and Glorious Anthem was a build I really enjoyed, and I have found a Shaman deck that works similarly using a combination of totems, casting Totemic Might once I have at least Healing Totem and one other, using a myriad of taunt neutral minions along with Raid Leaders, Stormwind's Mights and Frostwolf Champions. Cast Bloodlust once that build is reasonably set up and the game is over that turn. I like the build but it's not very flexible or quick and it's pretty easy to disrupt.

#34 Moshne

Moshne

    Soda Popinski

  •  Patrons
  • 2,656 posts

Posted 18 August 2013 - 07:35 PM

This isn't really mechanical, but the NPCs they choose feel really awkward.

Anduin, really? I've fought him a few times as Thrall and it is just jarring how off it feels. Surely Velen or Tyrande would have made more sense for a powerful figure.

Garrosh feels very forced. He is a relatively recent introduction to the main lore line, and we are killing him off soon. If they wanted a classic Orc warrior, his son would have felt better. Clearly dead characters are fine as we have Gul'dan and Uther.

This is just lore conmentary, and doesn't matter that much but felt like odd choices for immersion into the game

- 13/13 HM -25m - W/Th/Sun 8-12 CST LF Mistweaver
www.somethingwickedguild.com


#35 Jessamy

Jessamy

    Struck by Diax's Rake

  • Moderators
  • 4,803 posts

Posted 18 August 2013 - 08:05 PM

If they wanted a classic Orc warrior, his son would have felt better.

father?

#36 Pisshands

Pisshands

    A.K.A. Mr. Classy

  • • Guide Author
  • 187 posts

Posted 18 August 2013 - 08:15 PM

father?


Never give up, trust your instincts.

#37 diospadre

diospadre

    Hero of the Horde

  • Guild Members
  • 7,465 posts

Posted 18 August 2013 - 10:08 PM

Velen and Tyrande haven't done shit in five years. Anduin and Garrosh as heroes makes sense given that they're the characters currently in the spotlight.

#38 Dots

Dots

    Don Flamenco

  • Members
  • 446 posts

Posted 18 August 2013 - 11:06 PM

In response to the BoM vs Rockbiter discussion: Rockbiter can be cast on the hero while BoM cannot. That is the important difference. Rockbiter actually tends to be the better card.

#39 Hamlet

Hamlet

    Mike Tyson

  • • Guide Author
  • 11,567 posts

Posted 19 August 2013 - 04:36 AM

Yeah, someone pointed that out while I was streaming today, and I came to same conclusion (it's actually the better card). The option of being 1-for-1 removal at the cost of a few life adds a lot to something that was otherwise just a finisher (or bad 1-for-2 removal).

#40 malthrin

malthrin

    stalemate associate

  • Moderators
  • 9,107 posts

Posted 19 August 2013 - 04:08 PM

Braindump from this weekend. Mostly going to discuss the mechanical differences from MTG and their strategic consequences.

Mana
You automatically make your land drop every turn and it doesn't cost you any cards. This favors slower/high curve decks. In MTG, one of the advantages to playing a low curve deck is the ability to include fewer mana sources in your deck. If your deck is 20/60 mana sources while your opponent's is 30/60, in any given game you'll draw 33% more spells than your opponent. This gives you the ability to absorb a couple of two-for-ones and still compete in a resource battle. In Hearthstone, aggressive plans don't have that luxury - you win on tempo or lose.

This also makes mana sinks proportionately more important in low-curve decks. One of the basic heuristics for an MTG line of play is how well it uses your mana, on the theory that whichever player manages to spend more mana on beneficial effects will come out ahead, assuming relatively equal effects. I haven't seen any creatures that act as mana sinks, so this just means Hero powers. Warlock is clearly the best, but I'm unsure of the relative rankings in the middle of the pack. Warrior seems like the loser.

I haven't investigated Druid-style permanent or temporary ramp effects yet. Traditionally, these are very powerful.


Creature Combat
Here's the biggest difference. There's no blocking (single or multi) and creatures can attack each other.

In MTG, blocking has haste (charge). You play a creature, and it immediately deters one or more attackers. Not true in Hearthstone. Vanilla creatures (no abilities) basically don't exist until your next turn. As a result, stabilizing a board that you're behind on is often a multi-turn, attritiony process. You can take a lot of damage during that process, so start early. This is a roundabout way of saying not to play vanilla creatures that cost more than 2 or 3.

I see a lot of players incorrectly prioritizing board position (attacking opposing creatures) when they're ahead in a race.

Creatures attacking each other is a big difference from a defensive standpoint. Suddenly all your guys have the potential to eat two of theirs, given time. I'm still learning how to value health on a creature, but it's very different than MTG toughness. Priest seems like the best class to take advantage of this mechanic, playing as many cheap 2/x and 3/x (for large X) as possible. Haven't tried this yet, but it seems promising (and thematically appropriate!).


Opening Hands, Mulligans, and Play/Draw
I'm not sure why opening hands are so small (3/4 versus 7). It's possible that it was necessary to increase variance given the smaller deck size. Games might play out the same way every time with access to 7 out of your chosen 30.

The mulligan rule is an attempt to mitigate that variance - they don't want you to do the same thing every game, but they do want you to do something before you get run over. As mentioned earlier, catching up can be difficult and the best way to do it is to get on the board early. I usually mulligan any card that costs 3 or more in search of cheap spells. You'll have at least N draw steps before your Nth turn; odds are good that you'll draw that expensive spell again or an equivalent effect.

Getting an extra card for going second is normal; the Coin is worth talking about. I'm guessing this was intended as another compensation for small-opening-hand variance: "Sorry you mulliganed your 5s into more 5s. Here's some gold." I'm leaning toward it being too good. I haven't seen many significant 1-mana plays, so the Coin both gives you the option to 'go first' starting on 2 OR lets you accelerate on an important later turn OR synergies with anything triggering on spellcasts.


Sorry for the rambling post. Most of these thoughts hadn't been verbalized yet. There's a lot of MTG wisdom that I don't mention that carries over - basic concepts of card advantage, tempo, control and aggro roles - so I wanted to highlight the differences.
Lampkin in EJBSG 28 | Anders in EJBSG 24 | Cavil in EJBSG 20
Boomer in EJBSG 19 | Roslin in EJBSG 17 | Roslin in EJBSG 13 | Roslin in EJBSG 8
MTG Online draft viewer




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users