I watched the video and I know why: Zephrys avoids killing deathrattle creatures. [of course he doesn't know what they're doing, but he compares them with their mana and stats. (i.e. he sees deathrattle dangerous if he has a lot of mana and less stat) The pirate's mana:2 mana, stat:1 mana, he hesitated to kill him because he was a minion. In fact, he could still try to kill him, but the pirate could not trade profitably, so he decided it could be ignored. ]
I watched the video and I know why: Zephrys avoids killing deathrattle creatures. [of course he doesn't know what they're doing, but he compares them with their mana and stats. (i.e. he sees deathrattle dangerous if he has a lot of mana and less stat) The pirate's mana:2 mana, stat:1 mana, he hesitated to kill him because he was a minion. In fact, he could still try to kill him, but the pirate could not trade profitably, so he decided it could be ignored. ]
I guess...like getting to masters is a brutally difficult grind. Getting to diamond is easy breezy do it on your phone in your spare time.
For me the issue is simple I want to play Heimer, and Riven, and Taric and Lux, and Yassao, and all these slow value Champs and you just can't right now and that's not fun as a deck builder.
I agree, it sucks you can't play old champions when the meta get power crept too much.
but people are too Doomsayers about the game.. it feels bad that it seems like people really easily just forget that it's a card game and they all have those bad metas, while at least in Riot they won't keep the meta that way for too long since they do have a working balance team(in contrast to Blizzard in mean streets of gadgetzan era).
I really like the design of the game and the care put into it, I wish more people would play it and there were less "quitters" when things go wrong, I believe that if they return to monthly big balance patches they can make things right again.
I think people are overreacting coz the wild format is meant to be the place where you play any collectible card in the game. With banning Stealer of Souls, this action breaks that "rule", but in the end like you said, banning has been around for ages and isn't a new thing. Blizzard just did something different this time instead of nerfing the card. It's not the end of Hearthstone guys 🙃
Disconnects, server issues. And we're supposed to be thrilled by this announcement of cross region play?
4 games, 3 disconnects. Won one of them because the servers fucks everyone apparently. But then lost stars after being informed that I won my last disconnect? Yup, guess I wont be playing hearthstone today, and tomorrow too because I have shit to do and the last thing I need is to lose my games because blizz cant operate a server for shit.
Leaving aside the issue of who would want to play Eternal (because "nobody" is the obvious answer), Eternal would be a nightmare to maintain. I am guessing what you want is that the card magically change back and forth when it is the Eternal and Wild collection. And how would you explain to new (or even not new) players that the megabomb card they were using in their Eternal deck turned into a turd, but their other cards are literally just the same? I would expect that most players would consider this a bug, and would expect tons of "bug" reports.
Yep, you are right, my apologies... I suppose that when I learned about the option chosen by Blizzard, I went mad and I just expressed all my anger and rage without contributing anything positive.
Been getting some free wins in wild while using a soul stealer deck with plot twist that does not have a win condition. But people just surrender after they see those 2 cards. Trying to get the "Spend Health on cards" achivement.
I honestly don't think bans are that big of a deal.
They already ban cards in arena, duels, and the occasional tavern brawl. And if they nerfed this to the point of unplayability then it would effectively work the same as a ban.
Some people are calling this lazy, but all physical card games resort to bans for balance purposes, and MTG is over 25 years old and still going strong. I don't think this is an insult to wild players, I don't think this is lazy, and I don't think this sets any unneeded precedents for the future.
Some people are also saying that they shouldn't ban cards because then players will start asking for bans for everything they don't like, but people could already ask for nerfs for whatever they want whenever they want. I don't see how asking for bans is any worse.
Banning cards is just another way to balance the game, same as nerfs. Blizzard has "nerfed" cards in the past by changing their text (Warsong Commander, for example), I don't see how a ban is really that different.
Freak out as much as you want, but in just a few months you may come to realize that even with the existence of bans, hearthstone is still hearthstone. It isn't that big of a deal and I don't think it will impact the game as much as some people in the comments are implying.
Don't know if anyone already said this or if this solution wouldn't be another temporary answer, but why don't just limit the health cost to spells, like this week's brawl?
If I were a game developer, I wouldn't change the concept of immunity (which is quite obvious and self-explanatory) not even this specific card, because that would be a mere band-aid that would only serve to hide the real problem.
Make no mistake, the problem with this card is the same as always: the cost cheating problem. We must avoid trivializing the cost of cards, either in mana or health, as in this case.
The concept of PAYING in health instead of mana is interesting, especially in the thematic philosophy of warlocks. But paying means paying, if you don't give what is asked of you, you get nothing.
If you are immune and CANNOT lose health, then it should be impossible to make any health payments, therefore it is as when you have no mana to pay and therefore cannot play any more cards. Remember that the game already prevents you from playing cards for life if you don't have enough life to pay the cost! There is already a precedent.
Taking damage would be a different thing, since an immunity would prevent it, but if in the upper left corner of a card where its mana cost is usually shown inside a blue gem, there is now a drop of blood, that means that you have to give health as payment for playing it...
Practical example: imagine that a card is published whose text reads: "Battlecry: During the next turn, your opponent cannot spend mana". Then, even if your opponent has 10 mana crystals, or even if he has ways to recharge them, he could only play cards whose mana cost is zero on that turn, because he could not consume mana no matter how much he had.
I hope that it has been clear. Honestly, it would be the most elegant solution, and also, it would not only solve the problem of this card but it would have corrected the underlying problem at its roots, that is, it would have fixed the problem forever, even for future cards, as it would not be a simple patch or temporary solution.
It's true, you're right, I may have overstep being too "vehement", but it cannot be denied that I have only told the truth, it hurts whoever hurts.
What I love is how my comment has been voted negatively to death, but nevertheless nobody has dared to answer me trying to refute me, perhaps because refuting the reality would be impossible?It is obvious that people do not like to hear the truth...
Certainly, what I was trying to say was that due to the amount of champions in P&Z it's less likely that we'll get her soon compared to e.g. Pantheon in Targon. But you'll never know, she might be next (after Ekko who is pretty much certain to be the P&Z champion added in the upcoming expansion).
I guess...like getting to masters is a brutally difficult grind. Getting to diamond is easy breezy do it on your phone in your spare time.
For me the issue is simple I want to play Heimer, and Riven, and Taric and Lux, and Yassao, and all these slow value Champs and you just can't right now and that's not fun as a deck builder.
They address many of the issues that the community raises about the format.
FWIW - the Wild podcast "ecosystem" more-or-less unanimously regards the Stealer deck as being pretty bad (the bottom of Tier 3, falling to Tier 4 at more competitive ranks), since it tends to roll over against fast decks. The podcasters are also more-or-less agreed that it would be a good idea to nerf the card, since it's a high play-rate deck that's shitty to play against.
I´ve hit lvl 160 today, starting to do the Wailing Caverns achievements, so I might get a bit higher next week. After buying Heroes and Cardbacks for gold, I need to hoard as much as possible for the next expansion :P
Zephrys: the great fails
I watched the video and I know why: Zephrys avoids killing deathrattle creatures. [of course he doesn't know what they're doing, but he compares them with their mana and stats. (i.e. he sees deathrattle dangerous if he has a lot of mana and less stat) The pirate's mana:2 mana, stat:1 mana, he hesitated to kill him because he was a minion. In fact, he could still try to kill him, but the pirate could not trade profitably, so he decided it could be ignored. ]
Zephrys: the great fails
I watched the video and I know why: Zephrys avoids killing deathrattle creatures. [of course he doesn't know what they're doing, but he compares them with their mana and stats. (i.e. he sees deathrattle dangerous if he has a lot of mana and less stat) The pirate's mana:2 mana, stat:1 mana, he hesitated to kill him because he was a minion. In fact, he could still try to kill him, but the pirate could not trade profitably, so he decided it could be ignored. ]
Still No News From Riot?
I agree, it sucks you can't play old champions when the meta get power crept too much.
but people are too Doomsayers about the game.. it feels bad that it seems like people really easily just forget that it's a card game and they all have those bad metas, while at least in Riot they won't keep the meta that way for too long since they do have a working balance team(in contrast to Blizzard in mean streets of gadgetzan era).
I really like the design of the game and the care put into it, I wish more people would play it and there were less "quitters" when things go wrong, I believe that if they return to monthly big balance patches they can make things right again.
Hearthstone Bans Its First Card in Wild Next Week - Stealer of Souls
I think people are overreacting coz the wild format is meant to be the place where you play any collectible card in the game. With banning Stealer of Souls, this action breaks that "rule", but in the end like you said, banning has been around for ages and isn't a new thing. Blizzard just did something different this time instead of nerfing the card. It's not the end of Hearthstone guys 🙃
Group Therapy! Need to blow off some steam? Mega salty? Here's the place!
Disconnects, server issues. And we're supposed to be thrilled by this announcement of cross region play?
4 games, 3 disconnects. Won one of them because the servers fucks everyone apparently. But then lost stars after being informed that I won my last disconnect? Yup, guess I wont be playing hearthstone today, and tomorrow too because I have shit to do and the last thing I need is to lose my games because blizz cant operate a server for shit.
The Price Of Progress - Card Design Competition Discussion Thread
Good luck to everyone in the voting! I went ahead with my OP Cenarius, so I expect to lose great things!
Hearthstone Bans Its First Card in Wild Next Week - Stealer of Souls
Brofist, my man.
Hearthstone Bans Its First Card in Wild Next Week - Stealer of Souls
People like him are already marching to get every single power card nerfed. It's the same.
Hearthstone Bans Its First Card in Wild Next Week - Stealer of Souls
Leaving aside the issue of who would want to play Eternal (because "nobody" is the obvious answer), Eternal would be a nightmare to maintain. I am guessing what you want is that the card magically change back and forth when it is the Eternal and Wild collection. And how would you explain to new (or even not new) players that the megabomb card they were using in their Eternal deck turned into a turd, but their other cards are literally just the same? I would expect that most players would consider this a bug, and would expect tons of "bug" reports.
Darkseeker's channel - 13th November update: KOtsosKOtsos' Reno Evolve Shudderwock Shaman - ft. Archivist Elysiana
12th June update: Taylor Eve's Reno N'Zoth Shudderwock Shaman, ft. Lord Jaraxxus & INFERNOOOOO!?!
Taylor Eve hit legend with this awesome Reno N'Zoth Shudderwock Shaman deck (https://twitter.com/DrEvel_hs/status/1402048071157137413).
How do you beat a Quest Bird/Weasel Priest? Answer is simple. INFERNOOOO! ;-)
Games:
6:50 Big Priest
23:55 Odd Demon Hunter
26:51 Stealer of Souls Warlock
33:05 Quest Bird Priest
Deck code: AAEBAaoIHrIGuQ3+DfoO+g/DFoUX4KwCoLYC9r0Cx8EC38QCi84Cw+oC7/cCrZEDtZgDoaED/KMD4aUDkbED27gDk7kDqO4D4+4Dpu8DqIoEr58E/Z8E8KAEAAA=
https://youtu.be/oMRS8dhwhuA
[Game] Card Treasure Hunt (The Resurrection Attempt)
Nope, but on the right track, Anchor. Non native speakers may want to run a search for English expressions
Not you + Not bird + Not her
Hint: all of your words were wrong/ second word is another animal
Hearthstone Bans Its First Card in Wild Next Week - Stealer of Souls
Yep, you are right, my apologies... I suppose that when I learned about the option chosen by Blizzard, I went mad and I just expressed all my anger and rage without contributing anything positive.
Weekend Wild Hearthstone Decks - OTK Paladin, Clown Dragon Priest, Jade Rogue, & More!
For a reason you referred to above - think I'll maybe try some of these NEXT weekend :P
Rewards Track: Current progress 2.0
Almost lvl 130.
Been getting some free wins in wild while using a soul stealer deck with plot twist that does not have a win condition. But people just surrender after they see those 2 cards. Trying to get the "Spend Health on cards" achivement.
Hearthstone Bans Its First Card in Wild Next Week - Stealer of Souls
I honestly don't think bans are that big of a deal.
They already ban cards in arena, duels, and the occasional tavern brawl. And if they nerfed this to the point of unplayability then it would effectively work the same as a ban.
Some people are calling this lazy, but all physical card games resort to bans for balance purposes, and MTG is over 25 years old and still going strong. I don't think this is an insult to wild players, I don't think this is lazy, and I don't think this sets any unneeded precedents for the future.
Some people are also saying that they shouldn't ban cards because then players will start asking for bans for everything they don't like, but people could already ask for nerfs for whatever they want whenever they want. I don't see how asking for bans is any worse.
Banning cards is just another way to balance the game, same as nerfs. Blizzard has "nerfed" cards in the past by changing their text (Warsong Commander, for example), I don't see how a ban is really that different.
Freak out as much as you want, but in just a few months you may come to realize that even with the existence of bans, hearthstone is still hearthstone. It isn't that big of a deal and I don't think it will impact the game as much as some people in the comments are implying.
Hearthstone Bans Its First Card in Wild Next Week - Stealer of Souls
Don't know if anyone already said this or if this solution wouldn't be another temporary answer, but why don't just limit the health cost to spells, like this week's brawl?
Hearthstone Bans Its First Card in Wild Next Week - Stealer of Souls
Maybe that's because this post is lacking any constructivity and is nothing but the whining of a little boy whose favourite toy has been taken.
Your most recent post however, contains a preferable solution which I for one could totally get behind.
[Game] Card Treasure Hunt (The Resurrection Attempt)
Me plane his. Mal'Ganis?
[Game] Card Treasure Hunt (The Resurrection Attempt)
Wut?
Hearthstone Bans Its First Card in Wild Next Week - Stealer of Souls
If I were a game developer, I wouldn't change the concept of immunity (which is quite obvious and self-explanatory) not even this specific card, because that would be a mere band-aid that would only serve to hide the real problem.
Make no mistake, the problem with this card is the same as always: the cost cheating problem. We must avoid trivializing the cost of cards, either in mana or health, as in this case.
The concept of PAYING in health instead of mana is interesting, especially in the thematic philosophy of warlocks. But paying means paying, if you don't give what is asked of you, you get nothing.
If you are immune and CANNOT lose health, then it should be impossible to make any health payments, therefore it is as when you have no mana to pay and therefore cannot play any more cards. Remember that the game already prevents you from playing cards for life if you don't have enough life to pay the cost! There is already a precedent.
Taking damage would be a different thing, since an immunity would prevent it, but if in the upper left corner of a card where its mana cost is usually shown inside a blue gem, there is now a drop of blood, that means that you have to give health as payment for playing it...
Practical example: imagine that a card is published whose text reads: "Battlecry: During the next turn, your opponent cannot spend mana". Then, even if your opponent has 10 mana crystals, or even if he has ways to recharge them, he could only play cards whose mana cost is zero on that turn, because he could not consume mana no matter how much he had.
I hope that it has been clear. Honestly, it would be the most elegant solution, and also, it would not only solve the problem of this card but it would have corrected the underlying problem at its roots, that is, it would have fixed the problem forever, even for future cards, as it would not be a simple patch or temporary solution.
Hearthstone Bans Its First Card in Wild Next Week - Stealer of Souls
It's true, you're right, I may have overstep being too "vehement", but it cannot be denied that I have only told the truth, it hurts whoever hurts.
What I love is how my comment has been voted negatively to death, but nevertheless nobody has dared to answer me trying to refute me, perhaps because refuting the reality would be impossible? It is obvious that people do not like to hear the truth...
Pool Party Skins, Major Balance Changes, and the Ruination Event are Coming To Runeterra Soon
Certainly, what I was trying to say was that due to the amount of champions in P&Z it's less likely that we'll get her soon compared to e.g. Pantheon in Targon. But you'll never know, she might be next (after Ekko who is pretty much certain to be the P&Z champion added in the upcoming expansion).
Still No News From Riot?
I guess...like getting to masters is a brutally difficult grind. Getting to diamond is easy breezy do it on your phone in your spare time.
For me the issue is simple I want to play Heimer, and Riven, and Taric and Lux, and Yassao, and all these slow value Champs and you just can't right now and that's not fun as a deck builder.
Hearthstone Bans Its First Card in Wild Next Week - Stealer of Souls
For anyone interested in the topic, Iksar was recently a guest on the "State of Wild" podcast. Here's a link
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TW-6CsjDiO8&t=79s
They address many of the issues that the community raises about the format.
FWIW - the Wild podcast "ecosystem" more-or-less unanimously regards the Stealer deck as being pretty bad (the bottom of Tier 3, falling to Tier 4 at more competitive ranks), since it tends to roll over against fast decks. The podcasters are also more-or-less agreed that it would be a good idea to nerf the card, since it's a high play-rate deck that's shitty to play against.
Rewards Track: Current progress 2.0
I´ve hit lvl 160 today, starting to do the Wailing Caverns achievements, so I might get a bit higher next week. After buying Heroes and Cardbacks for gold, I need to hoard as much as possible for the next expansion :P