Hearthstone also had a significant amount of bugs, inconsistencies and balance issues back when they patched slowly, so I think overall quick patching improves the player experience.
There seem to be no ties in this game, the first one to strike the lethal wins, and since they casted the speels to lethal range before you attacked you lost, I assume it happens even if your strikes would life steal you above the treshold for losing..
onceFiora hits 4 procs or the nexus is down to 0 it's game over it doesn't matter what happens after that.
I prefer it that way.. cause a tie in hs for example.. means both players lost.. at least in this way someone wins..
maybe the only way to actually tie a game is to deal damage to both nexuses at the same time, there's currently only one card that does it in the caskets.. SO maybe it's possible.. but it's a fringe case atm cause nobody is playing casket seller atm
i can confirm killed my OP and the prankster killed me afterwards but i won, dont remenber the HP if was one or two of my OP but i was 1, but was pretty low hope it helps.
Today I learnt I've been playing MTG wrong this whole time, and the actual ruling makes me happy (:
Also salty guy gets countered by research, that always puts a smile on my face. But seriously it's not that big of a deal, even if this rule does somehow come as a surprise to you. Just learn the rule and learn to play around it and not just hyper aggro 100% of the time. You stopped your attacking unit from taking damage at the very least. And if you lost a game from it, so what? That's how we as a species learn: fire = hot, don't touch again.
They can always "fix stuff later". IN fact, that's what they've done in the past even before frequent patches became commonplace.
I remember when Silithid Swarmer got retroactively fixed with the beast tag.
These mistakes are going to happen at some point and at least now we get quicker fixes instead of having to wait for the next rotation.
I didn't claim it was a final proof. "It helps proving".
This fact falls in the same pattern as Galakrond half-otfix after 1 week.
Mistakes happen, but more mistakes happen if you allow yourself to be more daring/careless, and you are bound to be, if you know that everyone is ok or even happy with hotfixes.
This one for example is minor ofc, but how the hell could it even happen?!? Isn't the carelessness obvious (here, and in Galakrond Shaman)?
My point is they wouldn't be so daring/careless if they knew that repeated hotfixes are unacceptable for everyone.
What appears as more care for us (hotfixes) is actually contributing to its opposite.
I got dominated by this when I was playing Odd Rogue. I thought I had the guy, then he went off. I originally thought that he was just dinking off to play an obscene Van Cleef... then the damage hit. So now I am playing it as I love Combos.
it's exactly the opposite of what you say......once you remove a blocker in mtg the blocked creature can attack
I advise some fact-checking:
509.1h An attacking creature with one or more creatures declared as blockers for it becomes a blocked creature; one with no creatures declared as blockers for it becomes an unblocked creature. This remains unchanged until the creature is removed from combat, an effect says that it becomes blocked or unblocked, or the combat phase ends, whichever comes first. A creature remains blocked even if all the creatures blocking it are removed from combat.
I think a big reason why Jarraxus is so low is because demons have become so popular plus Nightmare Amalgams were removed, and you are only getting value from his hero power if your lineup has multiple demons. Compare against Tirion, who on paper has much weaker tribals but in practice is much more successful as no one else in the lobby wants to take his tribals.
I have been picking Millhouse Manastorm storm a lot, and end up in the top 4 every time. I'm still trying to figure out how to play his turn optimally. Unfortunately he gets punished A LOT harder than other heroes with bad rolls due to the 2 gold cost to refresh the tavern.
I don't think he's a top tier hero, but I think in the right hands, he is a good one to pick to get you in the top 4.
you don't go to the store silly, you go to your collection, select "show unowned" and then you can craft any card you like
Legendaries cost 3000 for example (although that amount of shards is better spent on expeditions tbh)
This. Or even if you own the card but want additional copies. Just right click on the card you want to craft. While you're there: click on the eye at the bottom right: you'll see the card's full artwork, which is usually really cool but so big that the card face only has room from a small cropped version. (My personal fav is Shark Chariot: did you know there's actually 3 sharks, and they're pulling Hecarim along?)
I would also argue that buying a specific Legendary could be better than buying an Expedition run and getting a random Legendary. All depends on your situation: how good you are at Expeditions, what constructed decks you want to play, what's in your existing collection, etc.
I have won twice with George, both times while playing demons which I think is the only optimal strat for George. And it's just so hard. If you dont win early with demons you lose, doubly so with george. Since you dont want to be shielding early minions that you'll probably sell later. And even if you do all that and you get to the end with big demons with divine shields, you get matched up against a nefarion who spends one gold to counter the investment of 28 gold. And you lose anyway. I only play him when I have the choice of nef george and another terrible hero like patchwork or milhouse. And you shouldnt even consider playing him unless you have no other choice if you dont have nef in the pool.
I wonder then if that is the only way to achieve a tie. Because every other scenario has a predetermined order. And if that is the only way to achieve a tie in this game, I gotta say that they made some pretty robust systems. It aggravated me in the moment, but it makes sense once you put it into words
Maybe if I have 1 HP and attack you with a big overwhelm, and you have a chump blocker and either Phantom Prankster and/or the chump blocker is Legion Grenadier: I could see the game logic applying the special effects to damage my nexus should be applied simultaneously as the carry-over damage to your nexus from my overwhelm and ruling that game a tie. I've thought about this a lot actually, but I haven't actually had the opportunity to confirm.
My understanding is that Overwhelm damage is simultaneous with ally damage, while ally effects (if they have a specific trigger) resolve immediately after the strike but before the next strike in combat. I haven't done any testing, though.
Spells have more priority when calculating the winner of the game. If a nexus were to die from spell damage before the opposing died from the minions on the board, the spell nexus would 'die first' and the winner would be declared.
Sort of? That's a slightly awkward way to phrase it, though. A better way would be that when you announce an attack, you're creating a "stack" of events that will fire in a certain sequence: any special effects go first (e.g., Legion Saboteur), then your left-most minion's attack, 2nd-from-left, etc. Then your opponent has opportunities to declare blockers, add a fast spell to the top of the stack meaning it happens before all the aforementioned, and/or play a burst spell (happens immediately)--and if he does any of those options, it goes back to you to cast any fast and/or burst spells, etc. But spells don't have innate priority over everything: if I summon a Ravenous Butcher off a Cursed Keeper with a Phantom Prankster on board, you take that 1 damage and I get my abomination both instantaneously--you don't get an opportunity to snipe or Purify anything first because none of that creates a stack. If I tried that same trick using a Glimpse Beyond, you would because that only happens at fast speed and it does create a stack. Make sense?
I wonder then if that is the only way to achieve a tie. Because every other scenario has a predetermined order. And if that is the only way to achieve a tie in this game, I gotta say that they made some pretty robust systems. It aggravated me in the moment, but it makes sense once you put it into words
Maybe if I have 1 HP and attack you with a big overwhelm, and you have a chump blocker and either Phantom Prankster and/or the chump blocker is Legion Grenadier: I could see the game logic applying the special effects to damage my nexus should be applied simultaneously as the carry-over damage to your nexus from my overwhelm and ruling that game a tie. I've thought about this a lot actually, but I haven't actually had the opportunity to confirm.
I was curious as to how good Sylvanas was, I thought she was okay but I've only had one decent game with her.
Got 3rd place (almost 2nd but RNG) Early game I took Murloc Tidehunter to summon and sacrifice Murloc Scout for double buff to a super lucky early golden Murloc Tidecaller Ended up with a 74 dmg Tidecaller!
Risky Skipper Not Being a Pirate an Oversight! Fixed in an Upcoming Patch
Hearthstone also had a significant amount of bugs, inconsistencies and balance issues back when they patched slowly, so I think overall quick patching improves the player experience.
All-Star Squad
Magic Trick
'nuff said
I need answers! Why wasn't this game a tie?!!
There seem to be no ties in this game, the first one to strike the lethal wins, and since they casted the speels to lethal range before you attacked you lost, I assume it happens even if your strikes would life steal you above the treshold for losing..
onceFiora hits 4 procs or the nexus is down to 0 it's game over it doesn't matter what happens after that.
there's a similar thread with a Fiora case btw.
I prefer it that way.. cause a tie in hs for example.. means both players lost.. at least in this way someone wins..
maybe the only way to actually tie a game is to deal damage to both nexuses at the same time, there's currently only one card that does it in the caskets.. SO maybe it's possible.. but it's a fringe case atm cause nobody is playing casket seller atm
Risky Skipper Not Being a Pirate an Oversight! Fixed in an Upcoming Patch
Was it also an oversight that all my decks are now incomplete, Blizzard? Let me guess, working as intended.
I need answers! Why wasn't this game a tie?!!
i can confirm killed my OP and the prankster killed me afterwards but i won, dont remenber the HP if was one or two of my OP but i was 1, but was pretty low hope it helps.
Risky Skipper Not Being a Pirate an Oversight! Fixed in an Upcoming Patch
The "Irish" were a mistake.
Kidding of course; just love an excuse to post some Thomas Nast!
what's with the mechanic of units not being able to attack after blockers have been removed from in front of them?
This thread puts a smile on my face :)
Today I learnt I've been playing MTG wrong this whole time, and the actual ruling makes me happy (:
Also salty guy gets countered by research, that always puts a smile on my face. But seriously it's not that big of a deal, even if this rule does somehow come as a surprise to you. Just learn the rule and learn to play around it and not just hyper aggro 100% of the time. You stopped your attacking unit from taking damage at the very least. And if you lost a game from it, so what? That's how we as a species learn: fire = hot, don't touch again.
Risky Skipper Not Being a Pirate an Oversight! Fixed in an Upcoming Patch
I didn't claim it was a final proof. "It helps proving".
This fact falls in the same pattern as Galakrond half-otfix after 1 week.
Mistakes happen, but more mistakes happen if you allow yourself to be more daring/careless, and you are bound to be, if you know that everyone is ok or even happy with hotfixes.
This one for example is minor ofc, but how the hell could it even happen?!? Isn't the carelessness obvious (here, and in Galakrond Shaman)?
My point is they wouldn't be so daring/careless if they knew that repeated hotfixes are unacceptable for everyone.
What appears as more care for us (hotfixes) is actually contributing to its opposite.
Elves make a pact with the Spirits for the Top 100 legend(Under Galakrond guidance)
I got dominated by this when I was playing Odd Rogue. I thought I had the guy, then he went off. I originally thought that he was just dinking off to play an obscene Van Cleef... then the damage hit. So now I am playing it as I love Combos.
what's with the mechanic of units not being able to attack after blockers have been removed from in front of them?
Actually . . .
Once a creature is blocked in MTG it stays blocked even if the blocker is removed.
Risky Skipper Not Being a Pirate an Oversight! Fixed in an Upcoming Patch
That's ok. :)
what's with the mechanic of units not being able to attack after blockers have been removed from in front of them?
I advise some fact-checking:
You're welcome.
The Statistically Worst Hero Choices in Hearthstone Battlegrounds
I'm not a BG player, but i've played 12 times with jaraxxus and won all of them.
Idk why have a place on the ranking heof worst heroes.
The Statistically Worst Hero Choices in Hearthstone Battlegrounds
I think a big reason why Jarraxus is so low is because demons have become so popular plus Nightmare Amalgams were removed, and you are only getting value from his hero power if your lineup has multiple demons. Compare against Tirion, who on paper has much weaker tribals but in practice is much more successful as no one else in the lobby wants to take his tribals.
The Statistically Worst Hero Choices in Hearthstone Battlegrounds
Professor Putricide gives +20 attack now.
Risky Skipper Not Being a Pirate an Oversight! Fixed in an Upcoming Patch
Oh, is he? I thought he was in Gurubashi Arena. Anyway, yeah he seems piratish regardless.
The Statistically Worst Hero Choices in Hearthstone Battlegrounds
I have been picking Millhouse Manastorm storm a lot, and end up in the top 4 every time. I'm still trying to figure out how to play his turn optimally. Unfortunately he gets punished A LOT harder than other heroes with bad rolls due to the 2 gold cost to refresh the tavern.
I don't think he's a top tier hero, but I think in the right hands, he is a good one to pick to get you in the top 4.
Shards
This. Or even if you own the card but want additional copies. Just right click on the card you want to craft. While you're there: click on the eye at the bottom right: you'll see the card's full artwork, which is usually really cool but so big that the card face only has room from a small cropped version. (My personal fav is Shark Chariot: did you know there's actually 3 sharks, and they're pulling Hecarim along?)
I would also argue that buying a specific Legendary could be better than buying an Expedition run and getting a random Legendary. All depends on your situation: how good you are at Expeditions, what constructed decks you want to play, what's in your existing collection, etc.
Risky Skipper Not Being a Pirate an Oversight! Fixed in an Upcoming Patch
Last time I mentioned Quality Insurance I was downvoted ^^
The Statistically Worst Hero Choices in Hearthstone Battlegrounds
I have won twice with George, both times while playing demons which I think is the only optimal strat for George. And it's just so hard. If you dont win early with demons you lose, doubly so with george. Since you dont want to be shielding early minions that you'll probably sell later. And even if you do all that and you get to the end with big demons with divine shields, you get matched up against a nefarion who spends one gold to counter the investment of 28 gold. And you lose anyway. I only play him when I have the choice of nef george and another terrible hero like patchwork or milhouse. And you shouldnt even consider playing him unless you have no other choice if you dont have nef in the pool.
[Game] Card Treasure Hunt (The Resurrection Attempt)
Chromaggus?
EDIT: Actually, it's Anomalus isn't it?
I need answers! Why wasn't this game a tie?!!
My understanding is that Overwhelm damage is simultaneous with ally damage, while ally effects (if they have a specific trigger) resolve immediately after the strike but before the next strike in combat. I haven't done any testing, though.
I need answers! Why wasn't this game a tie?!!
Sort of? That's a slightly awkward way to phrase it, though. A better way would be that when you announce an attack, you're creating a "stack" of events that will fire in a certain sequence: any special effects go first (e.g., Legion Saboteur), then your left-most minion's attack, 2nd-from-left, etc. Then your opponent has opportunities to declare blockers, add a fast spell to the top of the stack meaning it happens before all the aforementioned, and/or play a burst spell (happens immediately)--and if he does any of those options, it goes back to you to cast any fast and/or burst spells, etc. But spells don't have innate priority over everything: if I summon a Ravenous Butcher off a Cursed Keeper with a Phantom Prankster on board, you take that 1 damage and I get my abomination both instantaneously--you don't get an opportunity to snipe or Purify anything first because none of that creates a stack. If I tried that same trick using a Glimpse Beyond, you would because that only happens at fast speed and it does create a stack. Make sense?
Maybe if I have 1 HP and attack you with a big overwhelm, and you have a chump blocker and either Phantom Prankster and/or the chump blocker is Legion Grenadier: I could see the game logic applying the special effects to damage my nexus should be applied simultaneously as the carry-over damage to your nexus from my overwhelm and ruling that game a tie. I've thought about this a lot actually, but I haven't actually had the opportunity to confirm.
The Statistically Worst Hero Choices in Hearthstone Battlegrounds
I was curious as to how good Sylvanas was, I thought she was okay but I've only had one decent game with her.
Got 3rd place (almost 2nd but RNG) Early game I took Murloc Tidehunter to summon and sacrifice Murloc Scout for double buff to a super lucky early golden Murloc Tidecaller
Ended up with a 74 dmg Tidecaller!
Risky Skipper Not Being a Pirate an Oversight! Fixed in an Upcoming Patch
I down voted you only because your Avatar is Bill The Butcher and I find that to be offensive for some reason.