I'm not sure I should bother with this. I bought the last wild bundle in January, and eventually ended up dusting all of the cards, minus cards I couldn't like C'thun. I found that since I was still missing all the cards from Un'Goro, KotFT and K&C, I couldn't find any Wild decks I could make. I'm fairly certain I would still have to spend a lot of dust to craft a useable Wild deck, since you only get 8 packs instead of 10 this time, and it doesn't include any cards from adventures. Also, since I already triggered my pity counters for everything pre-Un'Goro, that makes it doubly not worth it, doesn't it?
It can take a few minutes for it to all properly sync on over.
You will need to go into account management to change your enabled cosmetics. I didn't have it do it by default just because some people may not want to flair themselves up.
I think I got everything linked, but not sure how to tell if they are actually linked/doing anything? I can remove them, so I assume that means they are linked. But not sure if they are sharing what needs to be shared.
4/5 chance every expansion to get a legend on a base of no packs bought. Hypothetically that’s really only one expansion out of the 8 that shouldn’t drop a legend. Pity timers aside you should average opening up a little more than 2 more legends on average.
Your guess that someone would not get any legends are so low it’s not worth discussing unless you misunderstand how the timers work. It’s a guaranteed legend in your first 10 packs, not on the 10th pack exactly
They already discounted the bundle by 75% man... not sure what else you could ask for besides free.
Just wanted to add a little more to what others have said:
I feel like Rat Pack might synergize well as a 1-of in a token style of deck. What I was thinking is that when you hit it with Dire Frenzy on Turn 7 it's like Violet Wurm but a turn earlier (though for 2 cards).
I could also see Flark's Boom-Zooka being fun with Silver Vanguard and Violet Wurm in the deck, but fitting it in would probably require a number of changes.
And then if you switch up the deck in a more traditional direction there's always old faithfuls like highrolling Devilsaur Egg, combo'n cards w/Spiritsinger Umbra, and ruining someone's day with Carnivorous Cube + Play Dead ;P
If you're interested in playing a Big Hunter in Standard, I recently uploaded a Boom-Zooka deck you might enjoy. While it focuses on big beasts, I have another version that swaps them out for a deathrattle package centered around Mechanical Whelp, Oblivitron, and Nine Lives (and then subs out the beast card draw and dire frenzy for [Hearthstone Card (Ursatron[Hearthstone Card (s and another Tracking).
We back! And by that I mean we skipped over a few minor changelogs this past week because we were working on larger site features. Here's everything we've done since June 10.
New Features
Connecting External Accounts
You can now connect the following accounts to your Out of Cards account
For Twitch supporters, a Tier 1 sub on Twitch is Bronze, T2 is Silver, T3 is Gold.
It is recommended only to use Twitch subs for Bronze Rank via Twitch Premium. Twitch only gives us 50% of the amount you spend which is why the tiers don't match up as they could.
Each rank comes with 3 cosmetic features on the site.
Forum Title - Displays on your posts
Avatar Border - Makes your avatar look prettier.
Profile Headers - COMING SOON
Please Note that avatar borders are placeholders. We're working on making them look much more awesome.
Frontpage Deck Widget
Moved to the top of the site, from the sidebar.
We now have separate listings for Standard and Wild Decks.
The style of the decks has been updated to give better organization between elements.
We know people would like to sort the widgets by class. We'll make it happen!
Changes
Forum threads now display the user who last replied. It isn't styled, we'll get a fix out for that in the next deploy.
Deck Copy Feature on the site now includes the deck name.
Several SEO improvements to pages on the site.
Bug Fixes
Global Moderators now correctly show up in staff blue. Sorry guys!
Fixed an issue with our hot score algorithm. My test deck should no longer show up on the homepage.
with other adventures you are only fighting one boss at a time, and you can change your deck to beat that spesific boss. so the heroic bosses need to be easier because you cannot edit your deck to fight them spesifically, and you fight eight in a row. this is probably why the Heroic mode feels underwhelming.
Sorry for the delay! I don't have any data yet, but I did sit down and theorycraft a little something for Wild :)
Discover may be my favorite mechanic (love getting more decision points + a way to adapt your strategy on the fly) so this deck features our boy Bloodscalp along with his friends Netherspite Historian and Firetree Witchdoctor :D
The deck is definitely rough in a few areas, but let me know what you think!
I didn't even realize they ran different decklists. I will have to check into that. Or my maybe my bucket picks are just poor. Thank you for your reply.
Why do you feel the need to capitalize the mon in pokemon? that's weird..
Dynamax isn't exciting to me... mega evolutions were the best I have a feeling there will not be new designs ("galar forms") or mega forms this time around.
Apart from looking at the statss and design and a bit of competitive 6v6 (not VGC) theorycrafting I am kinda retired from that franchise, I used to play a lot of pokemon showdown back in gen 5~6
I am ok with a smaller roster in the game.. I mean.. you have too many of them anyway it's hard to implement them again and again and again in every game.. finding a way to obtain them.. getting a model it's hard.. and it keeps getting harder..
If you want a CCG that throws loads of free stuff at you in the first week or so, try out Eternal, by Dire Wolf Digital. It's downloadable for free on Steam, or you can get it on Google Play. I think it's also on IOS.
Plays a lot like Magic: the Gathering, but with much better visuals than MtGA.
I used to play Eternal. But then they nerfed Armory and my experience since then, whenever I go back, has been related to trying and failing to revive it. It has been a while though. Maybe I'll try again this year.
I really like the above definition. Since hearthstone effectively constrains the player to interacting with enemy minions or their face (yes, there are *some* exceptions), a non-interactive deck is one that wins without a board, whether by a combo, a collection of burn spells or even fatigue.
Freezemage variants are an extreme case in that they also use board freezes, doomsayers, ice blocks to limit the opponent's options even more, although the latest iteration at least wins with giant discounted minions hitting face, so yay progress..?
Right? It makes total sense. The only thing is that smacking the face can undo all that in some situations, like say you're playing a bomb warrior versus a summoner mage. You see a board situation that is totally outrageous, so you smack the face with Wrenchcalibur while you have an Elekk whatever it is (the beast that shuffles cards) and also use your handy Brawl card to wipe out your mage opponent's minions. Hell, maybe your shuffle beast wins the brawl. On your turn you smacked the face and did a control move, hoping to swing the game in a non-interactive way. Maybe next turn the mage draws the bomb and dies. The whole point of smacking the face was not to smack the face, really. It was to screw over the opponent in a non-interactive move. The mage couldn't do much in response to that. Non-interactive
I find it strange when people call control decks non interactive. To me interactive decks care what your opponent are doing and change their game plan accordingly. I find control decks the most interactive because you have to control what the other player is doing. You choose to play reactively and use each card entirely based on what your opponent plays in order to exhaust their supplies and ultimately win. Pure aggro on the other hand and some combo decks are un-interactive in that they have a game plan and they play it out regardless of what the opponent is doing the same way every time all the time. I know that will not fit in with how some people feel but I also think the discussion of interactivity in Hearthstone is pretty tired and worn out. It isn't an overly interactive game which is why it is so simple and fun in a lot of ways and lends to its success.
I really like the above definition. Since hearthstone effectively constrains the player to interacting with enemy minions or their face (yes, there are *some* exceptions), a non-interactive deck is one that wins without a board, whether by a combo, a collection of burn spells or even fatigue.
Freezemage variants are an extreme case in that they also use board freezes, doomsayers, ice blocks to limit the opponent's options even more, although the latest iteration at least wins with giant discounted minions hitting face, so yay progress..?
You will never find a clear definition, because everyone stretches the meaning as they see fit, while staying in a dualistic system of meaning, which is objectively wrong. Just a rethoric trick.
We can go past that empasse, and define it as a spectrum of interactivity as it follows:
- the more a deck acts THROUGH* the board, the more interactive it is. **
*"Through the board" means using the board in order to reach the Face. This implies that a full-blown Control deck is very little interactive, equally to a Burn deck, just on opposite sides: the former mostly stops on the board, ignoring face, the latter mostly ignores the board and goes straight on the face.
** Despite all the other different actions, this is a board-centric game, designed to fight on the board. Anything else can only be indirectly answered at best (eg Aggro against Mill, Aggro counters Milling, but cannot really counter the forced card draw), hence being contextually uninteractive.
Interesting take on it all, really, and that's really true if you wish to leave out comparing Hearthstone to other card games, and it probably summarizes really well what players mean when they are playing Hearthstone and not comparing it to other games. However, you are assuming that the goal of every Hearthstone player is to smack the opponent in the face, or to take the liberty of doing so. That's not really the goal, but a means to achieving a win condition. Feeling like you're being "interactive" is not achieving "face-smacking." Your theory is interesting, but you assume that the goal of every player is to face smack. Sometimes the face smack is a way to get control of the board, not a result of controlling the board. And again, that requires taking a turn, which is only interacting with the state that results from a previous turn. How do you account for that in your definition?
How weird I find this right now at just this moment! I have just now learned that I have become a detached, soulless thing that won't even bother with the salty thread anymore. Earlier today I would have answered this question with "chuck all my electronic devices onto a fire pit and burn them all up into toxic fumes." But today was the day I was broken. I am now a broken Hearthstone player. I have now been brainwashed by the software algorithms. The computer is my boss and the things that happen in a match are what I deserve. Randomness is my master. I must obey the master. The master knows what is best for me and I must accept the will of the master. I will click buttons to the best of my ability and allow the RNG to decide the rest. If I lose to the RNG I will coldly press the "Play" button for a new matchup and play some more RNG cards into the void and see what I can do with them, all the while drawing from the deck that I created. If the other player can draw the nuts, I will just lose and feel nothing and play another game of Hearthstone after.
It's sort of like how you could imagine yourself being Mecha-Jarraxxus. A robot warlock. That's my state of Hearthstone mind now. Cold. Unfeeling. Capable of taking damage for fun. Because I'm a mech. And a warlock.
You will never find a clear definition, because everyone stretches the meaning as they see fit, while staying in a dualistic system of meaning, which is objectively wrong. Just a rethoric trick.
We can go past that empasse, and define it as a spectrum of interactivity as it follows:
- the more a deck acts THROUGH* the board, the more interactive it is. **
*"Through the board" means using the board in order to reach the Face. This implies that a full-blown Control deck is very little interactive, equally to a Burn deck, just on opposite sides: the former mostly stops on the board, ignoring face, the latter mostly ignores the board and goes straight on the face.
** Despite all the other different actions, this is a board-centric game, designed to fight on the board. Anything else can only be indirectly answered at best (eg Aggro against Mill, Aggro counters Milling, but cannot really counter the forced card draw), hence being contextually uninteractive.
Congratulations! That's a lot of time, energy, dedication, and patience, none of which I currently have. Enjoy your new card back at the end of the season and flaunt it a little!
Have you had a match where you just sit at your computer and put some minions on the board only to have your opponent freeze them over and over again, so it gets to the point where all you can do is press "end turn"? That's what we call a "non-interactive" match. You are not doing anything because your opponent has made it impossible for you to do anything, by design. All you can do is watch yourself die eventually.
Another example is when you kill a taunt, and then another, and then another. Then your opponent resurrects all of them three times and you have nothing to do but concede or press "end turn." Or, if you have anything left to use, you could try killing those. Eventually, you will die from not being able to answer the board effectively by design.
Finally, maybe your opponent just found this cool way to kill you in one turn. Boom, you're dead. Nothing you could do to prevent that. They got the right combo on their turn and zapped your rear.
This is what is meant by "non-interactive" in the most extreme sense. Hearthstone is not interactive as other games might be because your opponent can create situations by design that make you feel like you are watching them play solitaire. It stems from the fact that players can't interrupt each others' turns or intervene. Other card games allow for more interaction from your deck. Or your hero. Or both. Hearthstone turns are total turns. One player does a turn, then the next player does a turn. During a player's turn there is no interaction from the other player which can lead to scenarios I just listed as examples. In Hearthstone, your interaction is with the cards, not the opponent, which makes it "non-interactive." You do what you can with your hero power and your cards against your opponent's cards and hero power. You can't respond to what your opponent does on his or her turn and therefore you have no interaction with that player and / or their actions, just with the state of the board when they finish a turn
Toki's Wild Bundle Now Available - 56 Wild Card Packs on the Cheap
I'm not sure I should bother with this. I bought the last wild bundle in January, and eventually ended up dusting all of the cards, minus cards I couldn't like C'thun. I found that since I was still missing all the cards from Un'Goro, KotFT and K&C, I couldn't find any Wild decks I could make. I'm fairly certain I would still have to spend a lot of dust to craft a useable Wild deck, since you only get 8 packs instead of 10 this time, and it doesn't include any cards from adventures. Also, since I already triggered my pity counters for everything pre-Un'Goro, that makes it doubly not worth it, doesn't it?
Also, hi. I've decided to abandon Hearthpwn.
Out of Cards Changelog - 2019-06-18
Cool. I will check it out in a while. TY.
Out of Cards Changelog - 2019-06-18
It can take a few minutes for it to all properly sync on over.
You will need to go into account management to change your enabled cosmetics. I didn't have it do it by default just because some people may not want to flair themselves up.
Out of Cards Changelog - 2019-06-18
TY for the update.
I think I got everything linked, but not sure how to tell if they are actually linked/doing anything? I can remove them, so I assume that means they are linked. But not sure if they are sharing what needs to be shared.
Keep up the good work!
Toki's Wild Bundle Now Available - 56 Wild Card Packs on the Cheap
4/5 chance every expansion to get a legend on a base of no packs bought. Hypothetically that’s really only one expansion out of the 8 that shouldn’t drop a legend. Pity timers aside you should average opening up a little more than 2 more legends on average.
Your guess that someone would not get any legends are so low it’s not worth discussing unless you misunderstand how the timers work. It’s a guaranteed legend in your first 10 packs, not on the 10th pack exactly
They already discounted the bundle by 75% man... not sure what else you could ask for besides free.
Big Deathrattle Hunter.. any inputs?
Just wanted to add a little more to what others have said:
If you're interested in playing a Big Hunter in Standard, I recently uploaded a Boom-Zooka deck you might enjoy. While it focuses on big beasts, I have another version that swaps them out for a deathrattle package centered around Mechanical Whelp, Oblivitron, and Nine Lives (and then subs out the beast card draw and dire frenzy for [Hearthstone Card (Ursatron[Hearthstone Card (s and another Tracking).
Wild · Recruit Hunter · by RangDipkin · 7 years, 2 months ago
First Miracle Paladin
Very fun deck to play! Shrink Ray is very useful against all the Pogo Rogues :D
Out of Cards Changelog - 2019-06-18
We back! And by that I mean we skipped over a few minor changelogs this past week because we were working on larger site features. Here's everything we've done since June 10.
New Features
Changes
Bug Fixes
In the Works
No difference between heroic and normal act v
with other adventures you are only fighting one boss at a time, and you can change your deck to beat that spesific boss. so the heroic bosses need to be easier because you cannot edit your deck to fight them spesifically, and you fight eight in a row. this is probably why the Heroic mode feels underwhelming.
Bloodscalp Strategist Experimentations... Again looking for inputs
Sorry for the delay! I don't have any data yet, but I did sit down and theorycraft a little something for Wild :)
Discover may be my favorite mechanic (love getting more decision points + a way to adapt your strategy on the fly) so this deck features our boy Bloodscalp along with his friends Netherspite Historian and Firetree Witchdoctor :D
The deck is definitely rough in a few areas, but let me know what you think!
Wild · Midrange Hunter · by RangDipkin · 7 years, 2 months ago
No difference between heroic and normal act v
I didn't even realize they ran different decklists. I will have to check into that. Or my maybe my bucket picks are just poor. Thank you for your reply.
Here's some art, make a card! [Legacy Game]
Here's the link if it doesn't show up: http://sf.co.ua/12/12/wallpaper-680051.jpg
thoughts on PokeMon Sword/Shield
Umm...
thoughts on PokeMon Sword/Shield
Why do you feel the need to capitalize the mon in pokemon? that's weird..
Dynamax isn't exciting to me... mega evolutions were the best I have a feeling there will not be new designs ("galar forms") or mega forms this time around.
Apart from looking at the statss and design and a bit of competitive 6v6 (not VGC) theorycrafting I am kinda retired from that franchise, I used to play a lot of pokemon showdown back in gen 5~6
I am ok with a smaller roster in the game.. I mean.. you have too many of them anyway it's hard to implement them again and again and again in every game.. finding a way to obtain them.. getting a model it's hard.. and it keeps getting harder..
I'm bored. It's summer. Anyone has any ideas for games for me to play?
I used to play Eternal. But then they nerfed Armory and my experience since then, whenever I go back, has been related to trying and failing to revive it. It has been a while though. Maybe I'll try again this year.
What is the meaning of interactive deck?
Right? It makes total sense. The only thing is that smacking the face can undo all that in some situations, like say you're playing a bomb warrior versus a summoner mage. You see a board situation that is totally outrageous, so you smack the face with Wrenchcalibur while you have an Elekk whatever it is (the beast that shuffles cards) and also use your handy Brawl card to wipe out your mage opponent's minions. Hell, maybe your shuffle beast wins the brawl. On your turn you smacked the face and did a control move, hoping to swing the game in a non-interactive way. Maybe next turn the mage draws the bomb and dies. The whole point of smacking the face was not to smack the face, really. It was to screw over the opponent in a non-interactive move. The mage couldn't do much in response to that. Non-interactive
What is the meaning of interactive deck?
I find it strange when people call control decks non interactive. To me interactive decks care what your opponent are doing and change their game plan accordingly. I find control decks the most interactive because you have to control what the other player is doing. You choose to play reactively and use each card entirely based on what your opponent plays in order to exhaust their supplies and ultimately win. Pure aggro on the other hand and some combo decks are un-interactive in that they have a game plan and they play it out regardless of what the opponent is doing the same way every time all the time. I know that will not fit in with how some people feel but I also think the discussion of interactivity in Hearthstone is pretty tired and worn out. It isn't an overly interactive game which is why it is so simple and fun in a lot of ways and lends to its success.
What is the meaning of interactive deck?
I really like the above definition. Since hearthstone effectively constrains the player to interacting with enemy minions or their face (yes, there are *some* exceptions), a non-interactive deck is one that wins without a board, whether by a combo, a collection of burn spells or even fatigue.
Freezemage variants are an extreme case in that they also use board freezes, doomsayers, ice blocks to limit the opponent's options even more, although the latest iteration at least wins with giant discounted minions hitting face, so yay progress..?
What is the meaning of interactive deck?
Interesting take on it all, really, and that's really true if you wish to leave out comparing Hearthstone to other card games, and it probably summarizes really well what players mean when they are playing Hearthstone and not comparing it to other games. However, you are assuming that the goal of every Hearthstone player is to smack the opponent in the face, or to take the liberty of doing so. That's not really the goal, but a means to achieving a win condition. Feeling like you're being "interactive" is not achieving "face-smacking." Your theory is interesting, but you assume that the goal of every player is to face smack. Sometimes the face smack is a way to get control of the board, not a result of controlling the board. And again, that requires taking a turn, which is only interacting with the state that results from a previous turn. How do you account for that in your definition?
Here's some art, make a card! [Legacy Game]
Where's the next art?
How to best react when your opponent has the nuts
How weird I find this right now at just this moment! I have just now learned that I have become a detached, soulless thing that won't even bother with the salty thread anymore. Earlier today I would have answered this question with "chuck all my electronic devices onto a fire pit and burn them all up into toxic fumes." But today was the day I was broken. I am now a broken Hearthstone player. I have now been brainwashed by the software algorithms. The computer is my boss and the things that happen in a match are what I deserve. Randomness is my master. I must obey the master. The master knows what is best for me and I must accept the will of the master. I will click buttons to the best of my ability and allow the RNG to decide the rest. If I lose to the RNG I will coldly press the "Play" button for a new matchup and play some more RNG cards into the void and see what I can do with them, all the while drawing from the deck that I created. If the other player can draw the nuts, I will just lose and feel nothing and play another game of Hearthstone after.
It's sort of like how you could imagine yourself being Mecha-Jarraxxus. A robot warlock. That's my state of Hearthstone mind now. Cold. Unfeeling. Capable of taking damage for fun. Because I'm a mech. And a warlock.
What is the meaning of interactive deck?
You will never find a clear definition, because everyone stretches the meaning as they see fit, while staying in a dualistic system of meaning, which is objectively wrong. Just a rethoric trick.
We can go past that empasse, and define it as a spectrum of interactivity as it follows:
- the more a deck acts THROUGH* the board, the more interactive it is. **
*"Through the board" means using the board in order to reach the Face. This implies that a full-blown Control deck is very little interactive, equally to a Burn deck, just on opposite sides: the former mostly stops on the board, ignoring face, the latter mostly ignores the board and goes straight on the face.
** Despite all the other different actions, this is a board-centric game, designed to fight on the board. Anything else can only be indirectly answered at best (eg Aggro against Mill, Aggro counters Milling, but cannot really counter the forced card draw), hence being contextually uninteractive.
Here's some art, make a card! [Legacy Game]
Next:
First Time Legend!
Congratulations! That's a lot of time, energy, dedication, and patience, none of which I currently have. Enjoy your new card back at the end of the season and flaunt it a little!
What is the meaning of interactive deck?
Have you had a match where you just sit at your computer and put some minions on the board only to have your opponent freeze them over and over again, so it gets to the point where all you can do is press "end turn"? That's what we call a "non-interactive" match. You are not doing anything because your opponent has made it impossible for you to do anything, by design. All you can do is watch yourself die eventually.
Another example is when you kill a taunt, and then another, and then another. Then your opponent resurrects all of them three times and you have nothing to do but concede or press "end turn." Or, if you have anything left to use, you could try killing those. Eventually, you will die from not being able to answer the board effectively by design.
Finally, maybe your opponent just found this cool way to kill you in one turn. Boom, you're dead. Nothing you could do to prevent that. They got the right combo on their turn and zapped your rear.
This is what is meant by "non-interactive" in the most extreme sense. Hearthstone is not interactive as other games might be because your opponent can create situations by design that make you feel like you are watching them play solitaire. It stems from the fact that players can't interrupt each others' turns or intervene. Other card games allow for more interaction from your deck. Or your hero. Or both. Hearthstone turns are total turns. One player does a turn, then the next player does a turn. During a player's turn there is no interaction from the other player which can lead to scenarios I just listed as examples. In Hearthstone, your interaction is with the cards, not the opponent, which makes it "non-interactive." You do what you can with your hero power and your cards against your opponent's cards and hero power. You can't respond to what your opponent does on his or her turn and therefore you have no interaction with that player and / or their actions, just with the state of the board when they finish a turn