| Forum Index > Hearthstone General |
|
TheTenthDoc
United States9561 Posts
On August 30 2013 04:18 calgar wrote: That's interesting because I feel like 2 life for a card is the best ability because it helps you overrun early with card advantage. The nice thing about the Rogue is that the hero ability is spending 2 life+2 mana for a card (of your opponents) a lot of the time. | ||
|
Jermstuddog
United States2231 Posts
On August 30 2013 07:29 Azuzu wrote: But it's not a random deck. You have to build it based on the cards you are given and there is a huge amount of skill in card selection. Taking Magic as an example. Top level competition exists as a combination of limited(Arena) and constructed(usually "modern" and "standard"). Many tournaments have both formats within the same swiss bracket. I agree that top-level play should involve both styles, but I think you are hating on high-meta games because they are high-meta. At the end of the day, it is harder and requires more game understanding to build a top-level deck than to build an arena (or draft) deck. Draft modes are inherently interesting BECAUSE the players do not have the option of putting together the best cards possible, and while this is great, it is still a limiter, forcing lower-level, scrappier play styles. More interesting != better, however unfortunate that may be for you as a viewer. | ||
|
BlueBird.
United States3889 Posts
On August 30 2013 08:56 Jermstuddog wrote: I agree that top-level play should involve both styles, but I think you are hating on high-meta games because they are high-meta. At the end of the day, it is harder and requires more game understanding to build a top-level deck than to build an arena (or draft) deck. Draft modes are inherently interesting BECAUSE the players do not have the option of putting together the best cards possible, and while this is great, it is still a limiter, forcing lower-level, scrappier play styles. More interesting != better, however unfortunate that may be for you as a viewer. Umm that's not true at all at least for Magic. For instance, I can easily assess a meta in MTG, and choose what I feel is the best constructed deck, and do well with it. But for limited, I have issues drafting with top players. Saying it's harder and requires more understanding as an absolute like that is just ridiculous I'm sorry. Also, you can always have a friend build your constructed deck for you, and as long as your mechanics are good you can pilot it to a top finish. Many mtg pros use other pros decks, many of the current pro teams are known to have 1 person within the team come up with some pretty brilliant decks, and some of the rest of them aren't the best deck constructers, actually many of them are limited experts, and they just have insane mechanics for constructed. Good luck getting someone to build your limited deck for you during an event. Of course Hearthstone is a different animal, there are only 3 cards to choose from and your not drafting against others, so no signals. no hate drafting etc, but come on, these absolutes are ridiculous. From what I've seen of Hearthstone constructed so far Arena seems far more competitive for me personally and this is coming from a mtg player who did the best in construced | ||
|
RagequitBM
Canada2270 Posts
| ||
|
malcram
2752 Posts
As I've been exclusively playing draft only, I'm beginning to find a few things which, in my opinion, are flaws. Putting aside which classes are stronger/weaker (believe or not, my priest draft went 6-3). I think the drafting needs to be fine tuned a lot. There's just way too much luck involved! Maybe it was because of a couple of bad drafts or I'm just bad. But if you open cards with little to no synergistic qualities or you just do not get good rares at all, seems like you're screwed. Or if the opponents open up some crazy legendaries/epics. My first 3 Arena games were 4-3, 6-3, 6-3. After that, it was 1-3, 3-3, 0-3. That was demoralizing. But I think for the most part, the decks that I drafted were terrible BECAUSE of cards that were weak overall. At least in MTG, you're able to read signals and draft from the same pool of cards. Which makes playing around things easier. In hearthstone, you've got to play around everything lol... Bah, I think I'm ranting just because of a string of bad games. just my 2c. | ||
|
figq
12519 Posts
It's also designed to be very suitable for handheld devices and such, so people are going to play it anywhere all the time. The natural accessibility is not something to be underestimated. Sure, Magic could also be made portable, but there will be mechanics in it that lead to extremes which can't be dealt with nicely. For example, H. has comparatively low limit for max hand size and board creature numbers. So they'll always fit in a small screen. The mana is not in lands (more cards), which saves screen space too. Speaking of mana, I really like the mana simplification of H. - it does not lower the complexity of the game significantly, and it does prevent a lot of RNG factors that otherwise exist in such games. The hero game element is also nice. It felt like when first seeing introduced heroes in WarCraft, which added more flavor to RTS. Damaged minions don't heal next turn, which is actually awesome! It opens a lot more complexity in regard to all kinds of healing spells and mechanics. I love the no chat in game decision and the standard options for chat phrases. Do note: that's not just to prevent the usual profane aspects of game chatting. No, it's moreover again about accessibility for smaller screens and simpler input methods. Finally, I had an idea for a Starcraft-related card: Drone 2 cost 1 attack 2 health At the beginning of your turn, harvests one mana crystal from you and brings one health to your hero. In fact, people have done some really good MTG SC packs/decks. Considering some important differences in the mechanics with Hearthstone, maybe we could think of a whole new starcraft-themed deck for Hearthstone. | ||
|
SarcasmMonster
3136 Posts
Starcraft Edit: Colossus card would hit two adjacent enemies per attack. | ||
|
Pooshlmer
United States1001 Posts
| ||
|
rezoacken
Canada2719 Posts
On August 30 2013 12:13 SarcasmMonster wrote: IMO the main advantage of Hearthstone over Magic is the sounds and visuals. The game feels more alive then paper TCG. Starcraft Edit: Colossus card would hit two adjacent enemies per attack. MTG was designed as a material CCG, Heartstone is a video game first. So yeah of course Heartstone looks better on our screens. Heartstone made paper would suck pretty bad compared to MTG once you remove all the prettiness, sounds, computer calculations of life, etc. I'd just hoped HS had more complexity, maybe after some patches I'll see how it does (but Blizzard being so slow at releasing anything... I dont know). Right now It looks fun for a couple of hours but after watching some hours on stream I don't see myself pouring hours into it so even less spending money. | ||
|
Zooper31
United States5710 Posts
On August 30 2013 13:21 rezoacken wrote: MTG was designed as a material CCG, Heartstone is a video game first. So yeah of course Heartstone looks better on our screens. Heartstone made paper would suck pretty bad compared to MTG once you remove all the prettiness, sounds, computer calculations of life, etc. I'd just hoped HS had more complexity, maybe after some patches I'll see how it does (but Blizzard being so slow at releasing anything... I dont know). Right now It looks fun for a couple of hours but after watching some hours on stream I don't see myself pouring hours into it so even less spending money. HS will have more complexity as the game gets more cards and new things are introduced. First and foremost though it's an easily accessible card game for casual gamers. It's not even gonna come close to MTG and the 2 can't even be compared. | ||
|
fascistfromhell
1689 Posts
I guess I'm already addicted =P | ||
|
Serek
United Kingdom459 Posts
If you want MTG go play MTG... Too expensive you say? Well, you get what you pay for. | ||
|
figq
12519 Posts
| ||
|
DaCruise
Denmark2457 Posts
On August 30 2013 15:31 fascistfromhell wrote: I'm watching streams of this game for 5+ hours a day and I have never played a TCG in my life. I guess I'm already addicted =P Same here (except that I played Scrolls for like 2 days before getting bored). HS just looks like an awesome game. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On August 30 2013 13:21 rezoacken wrote: MTG was designed as a material CCG, Heartstone is a video game first. So yeah of course Heartstone looks better on our screens. Heartstone made paper would suck pretty bad compared to MTG once you remove all the prettiness, sounds, computer calculations of life, etc. I'd just hoped HS had more complexity, maybe after some patches I'll see how it does (but Blizzard being so slow at releasing anything... I dont know). Right now It looks fun for a couple of hours but after watching some hours on stream I don't see myself pouring hours into it so even less spending money. Comparing a CCG that is over ten years old to one in beta is silly. Complexity grows with time and people playing the game, not being "pre-baked" into the game. Meta games don't develop without players. | ||
|
lastshadow
United States1372 Posts
On August 30 2013 07:46 TheTenthDoc wrote: The nice thing about the Rogue is that the hero ability is spending 2 life+2 mana for a card (of your opponents) a lot of the time. While rogue is tier 0, anyone who says warlocks ability is bad just doesn't understand TCG's at a high level. Warlock will be broken if he gets more support in the future, as for now he probably is sitting at a realistic tier 3 due to people not understanding his core power, whereas realistically he's tier 1. | ||
|
Cixah
United States11285 Posts
| ||
|
Godwrath
Spain10126 Posts
| ||
|
Usagi
Spain1647 Posts
| ||
|
RagequitBM
Canada2270 Posts
On August 30 2013 20:28 lastshadow wrote: While rogue is tier 0, anyone who says warlocks ability is bad just doesn't understand TCG's at a high level. Warlock will be broken if he gets more support in the future, as for now he probably is sitting at a realistic tier 3 due to people not understanding his core power, whereas realistically he's tier 1. I think rather than his ability being bad, it's the warlock specific cards that are not so good. They really are not that impressive. | ||
| ||
|
|
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
CSO Cup
Sparkling Tuna Cup
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
Wardi Open
RotterdaM Event
Replay Cast
WardiTV Summer Champion…
RSL Revival
PiGosaur Monday
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
