These are bot-posts which have been deleted by moderation staff. I'm unsure why you can see them though - I'm sure Flux will respond on this soon with further information.
I wholly agree. But then, I suppose in any digital card game where you're actively trying to limit card text, you're always going to run into weird interactions that don't really make sense on the face of it.
As for the main topic, I fail to see how having BG split from HS would make HS a better game in any way. The whole "make sure there's a large enough fanbase before kicking off a standalone game" doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me either simply because despite having a bunch of questionable actions the last couple of years (Diablo Immortal, Blitzchung incident, Warcraft 3 reformed), they can still release a new game and have a ton of people adopt it quickly.
While I agree that separating HSBG from HS wouldn't make sense (HSBG really doesn't have what it takes to stand alone in the auto-battler genre, in my opinion, while it can operate in a floating niche as a lightweight alternative via the HS client) - in a hypothetical world where it was done, I think it'd be done more to support HSBG than HS.
I don't think it'd be beneficial to HS in the slightest, but I can see significant benefit in getting some distance for HSBG - being inextricably tied to HS closes a lot of design doors. It's very difficult for them to release interesting new minions for HSBG when they're inevitably required to 'work' in the context of HS itself (even if they don't actually exist in HS). There are all kinds of mechanics they could use for minions - such as, for example, having an effect which triggers if you lost the previous round - which they can't really use so long as HSBG is required to be a reflection of HS.
The cynic in me thinks you're supposed to feel that way. If you're sat around for the last month of the pre-expansion period saying 'SO FREAKIN' BORED' then you're more likely to be excited when the new set rolls in and therefore more likely to spend money to be able to access the new tools quickly.
Of course, if that was done by design it'd have to be done very carefully, so people are bored enough to jump on the new stuff without being so bored that they jump ship entirely. But equally, big game companies employ a lot of people with a lot of experience in persuading people to part with their money. Hm.
Just accept that Barrier negates damage after it has been dealt, and everything falls into place for this and many other interactions (such as Overwhelm).
To me, this contradicts the meaning of "dealing" damage. If damage is dealt, the target has to lose the corresponding amount of health - that's how I see it. You could talk about the damage being assigned before the barrier negates it and prevents it from being dealt.
I suppose what 40D is getting at is that the damage exists, and then is reduced to 0 - rather than in Frostbite's case where the strike never happens and so there's nothing to reduce.
I would maintain that it's not intuitive in the least, but there you are.
Thing is, shareholders are bound to acknowledge that putting customers (and product originality) ahead of immediate revenue is actually what made Blizzard such a valuable brand!
-snip-
Unfortunately that's not how real-world finance tends to work. Most investment on this sort of scale expects to see significant returns in a max 3-5 year window. If you're investing for long-term growth you typically diversify heavily to give a better stability.
I doubt entertainment companies are typical investment targets for long-term growth in any case because the medium is inherently fickle. You don't invest for the long term in an industry that can see massive consumer movement in the space of a few weeks.
@FieselFitz - the phrase 'once bitten twice shy' comes to mind... :P
Millbane rogue was the worst. At one hand, I am glad that it is gone. On the other hand, I would like to meet them on ladder and steal their win condition with Kobold Stickyfinger :)
Sadly at the time it was reasonably popular I was playing Renolock, so the best I could hope for was that they'd get greedy and misplay - empty their deck then break their weapon without immediately re-drawing it. If they did that then Gnomeferatu would auto-win the game. Sadly, a halfway-decent Mill Rogue player wouldn't let that happen, so I'd need to survive long enough to draw both Gluttonous Ooze AND the Gnomeferatu without either being milled, which rarely happened.
10/10 challenger for 10 is probably fair for a Champion, but I think it's a little too strong with 'immune to spells' bolted on as well. Part of the reason higher cost cards get a beneficial premium is they're risky plays that can be countered by removal, and that's obviously less true when removal can't touch it!
The level-up condition I'm undecided about, as I don't really pay attention to how much spell vs regular mana I spend over the course of the game. I like that it's there, but I feel the card should maybe do something interesting rather than just getting a fat stats buff - you'd want a good reason to try to level him up over the course of the game, thus changing your entire game plan, because I suspect a flat +5/+5 isn't enough to get there (i.e. the player wouldn't build or play any differently and if he levels, he levels).
It also regains Ephemeral if you removed that keyword.
Thank god for that, could you imagine a bunch of replicating Elusive Shadowseers that stay on the board indefinitely
Honestly I don't think it'd be that bad. 1 health means it dies to basically any removal of any kind (and indeed, can't block anything without dying), and you're spending a five mana initial outlay to set it up (since you have to remove the Ephemeral).
I mean don't get me wrong, it'd be strong, but I don't know that it'd be that bad, y'know?
That's missing a crucial piece of the puzzle, though: You're limited to 3 expedition rewards per week. With the previous version of the vault, you would've been able to score a guaranteed 4 champions per week (presupposing that you're able to afford the 3 expedition runs without the free token). Now it's just 3.
I mean, sure, but that's just a rate-of-unlock issue, not a level-of-rewards issue.
Personally I'm not really having any issues with the rate of unlocks, but to each their own I guess.
I remember hearing that rumor for a while but after a couple of no champion level 13 vaults it looks busted to me. This might have been a beta thing? This sounds like myth that got started somewhere...
It's not a myth, simply outdated information. Previously, vaults at level 10+ were guaranteed a champion. Now, vaults of that level are guaranteed an Expedition token - and Expeditions always award you with one random champion as an absolute minimum reward. You're still getting the champion (and can get it instantly by just starting the Expedition and then surrendering it) but you have the option for some Expedition fun as well.
Yeah, I'd agree that this doesn't feel intuitive. Then again, it's not like Crimson decks are overrunning the meta right now, so stealth-nerfing them is probably unnecessary *_*
In my opinion, anything dependent on a specific champion to work properly isn't a good fit for ladder. Decks that build around champions like Jinx and Yasuo basically just write off any game in which they don't draw their centrepiece and are easy prey for decks that pack proper removal. Heimer decks are about the only exception, and that's because they basically carry a thousand and one tools to protect themselves, and even then it's sketchy.
I figure they'll just continually reprint him like they did with Zayle. I mean, real talk - the number of people who play more than half a dozen games with Whizbang in a month can't be all that high, proportionately...
I'm not really clear on why people want the dust system revamped - not criticizing the point, I honestly just don't see a problem with it. Anyone care to enlighten me?
The economy of the game sucks, you can't normally experiment with new decks yourself because it's very expensive and if you don't wanna be stuck with bad decks you would just wait for the data.. it creates the influx of net decking..
I see. Not something I'm accustomed to, I'm afraid, as a massive whale. I can see how that would be problematic for people unable, or unwilling, to buy a lot of packs though
So far, completed Freljord and partway through Ionia and Shadow Isles. Not started on the others - I like to complete one before I move on.
These are bot-posts which have been deleted by moderation staff. I'm unsure why you can see them though - I'm sure Flux will respond on this soon with further information.
I wholly agree. But then, I suppose in any digital card game where you're actively trying to limit card text, you're always going to run into weird interactions that don't really make sense on the face of it.
The alternative, of course, is to start printing rules in-depth on the cards...
While I agree that separating HSBG from HS wouldn't make sense (HSBG really doesn't have what it takes to stand alone in the auto-battler genre, in my opinion, while it can operate in a floating niche as a lightweight alternative via the HS client) - in a hypothetical world where it was done, I think it'd be done more to support HSBG than HS.
I don't think it'd be beneficial to HS in the slightest, but I can see significant benefit in getting some distance for HSBG - being inextricably tied to HS closes a lot of design doors. It's very difficult for them to release interesting new minions for HSBG when they're inevitably required to 'work' in the context of HS itself (even if they don't actually exist in HS). There are all kinds of mechanics they could use for minions - such as, for example, having an effect which triggers if you lost the previous round - which they can't really use so long as HSBG is required to be a reflection of HS.
The cynic in me thinks you're supposed to feel that way. If you're sat around for the last month of the pre-expansion period saying 'SO FREAKIN' BORED' then you're more likely to be excited when the new set rolls in and therefore more likely to spend money to be able to access the new tools quickly.
Of course, if that was done by design it'd have to be done very carefully, so people are bored enough to jump on the new stuff without being so bored that they jump ship entirely. But equally, big game companies employ a lot of people with a lot of experience in persuading people to part with their money. Hm.
I suppose what 40D is getting at is that the damage exists, and then is reduced to 0 - rather than in Frostbite's case where the strike never happens and so there's nothing to reduce.
I would maintain that it's not intuitive in the least, but there you are.
Unfortunately that's not how real-world finance tends to work. Most investment on this sort of scale expects to see significant returns in a max 3-5 year window. If you're investing for long-term growth you typically diversify heavily to give a better stability.
I doubt entertainment companies are typical investment targets for long-term growth in any case because the medium is inherently fickle. You don't invest for the long term in an industry that can see massive consumer movement in the space of a few weeks.
@FieselFitz - the phrase 'once bitten twice shy' comes to mind... :P
Sadly at the time it was reasonably popular I was playing Renolock, so the best I could hope for was that they'd get greedy and misplay - empty their deck then break their weapon without immediately re-drawing it. If they did that then Gnomeferatu would auto-win the game. Sadly, a halfway-decent Mill Rogue player wouldn't let that happen, so I'd need to survive long enough to draw both Gluttonous Ooze AND the Gnomeferatu without either being milled, which rarely happened.
Oof. Big stats.
10/10 challenger for 10 is probably fair for a Champion, but I think it's a little too strong with 'immune to spells' bolted on as well. Part of the reason higher cost cards get a beneficial premium is they're risky plays that can be countered by removal, and that's obviously less true when removal can't touch it!
The level-up condition I'm undecided about, as I don't really pay attention to how much spell vs regular mana I spend over the course of the game. I like that it's there, but I feel the card should maybe do something interesting rather than just getting a fat stats buff - you'd want a good reason to try to level him up over the course of the game, thus changing your entire game plan, because I suspect a flat +5/+5 isn't enough to get there (i.e. the player wouldn't build or play any differently and if he levels, he levels).
Honestly I don't think it'd be that bad. 1 health means it dies to basically any removal of any kind (and indeed, can't block anything without dying), and you're spending a five mana initial outlay to set it up (since you have to remove the Ephemeral).
I mean don't get me wrong, it'd be strong, but I don't know that it'd be that bad, y'know?
All I'm seeing so far is a thread full of people who apparently don't remember wild mill rogue...
@ArngrimUndying - that's an awful lot of text to point at me for such a throwaway joke :P
I mean, sure, but that's just a rate-of-unlock issue, not a level-of-rewards issue.
Personally I'm not really having any issues with the rate of unlocks, but to each their own I guess.
'We're announcing our unconditional surrender to Riot Games and hoping they'll be gentle with us.'
It's not a myth, simply outdated information. Previously, vaults at level 10+ were guaranteed a champion. Now, vaults of that level are guaranteed an Expedition token - and Expeditions always award you with one random champion as an absolute minimum reward. You're still getting the champion (and can get it instantly by just starting the Expedition and then surrendering it) but you have the option for some Expedition fun as well.
Yeah, I'd agree that this doesn't feel intuitive. Then again, it's not like Crimson decks are overrunning the meta right now, so stealth-nerfing them is probably unnecessary *_*
In my opinion, anything dependent on a specific champion to work properly isn't a good fit for ladder. Decks that build around champions like Jinx and Yasuo basically just write off any game in which they don't draw their centrepiece and are easy prey for decks that pack proper removal. Heimer decks are about the only exception, and that's because they basically carry a thousand and one tools to protect themselves, and even then it's sketchy.
I figure they'll just continually reprint him like they did with Zayle. I mean, real talk - the number of people who play more than half a dozen games with Whizbang in a month can't be all that high, proportionately...
RIP Mr Wock, I'll never forget you giving me my first Legend finish in standard <3
I see. Not something I'm accustomed to, I'm afraid, as a massive whale. I can see how that would be problematic for people unable, or unwilling, to buy a lot of packs though