I would like to see how this will effect the existing decks. It seems like I need to tweak my own decks. Especially the ones with Kalista, Thresh and Lux.
Weird change for Lux tho, Seems like buff and nerf at the same time. I guess it is more useful then the older one.
I liked the spell changes of Burst to Fast, Fast to Slow and also some spell and unit changes from Deal all to deal units only. Especially Intimidating Roar in Yasuo decks. It was needed in my opinion.
Liked Withering Wail change too. It is not a dead card in some situations after this change.
I don't think that Garen, Draven, Shen nerfs will affect their playrate. Garen might even be more playable with this change since it isn't a buildaround card like, for example Draven. Draven seems still ok with this change. It is a Discard/aggro card after all.
I hated She Who Wanders in first preview and I still hate her after her new mana cost. It doesn't change anything. Units to Followers seems reasonable but still takes a huge advantage among other strategies. Most of the champions, especially aggro ones can't answer this huge threat along. Sorry but I didn't like the change of her. In my opinion, She must be able to obliterate the units on play, not hands. Let's see how she who wins will be after this change.
Ah and, I had tried to make Mageseeker Investigator work and liked her design. I really disliked her change. Let's see how a tech card she will be.
Edit: I have yet read all and watched the video and see that we can see which champions the opponent has in decks ? That's great, I guess ? I mean, It may help for mulligans. Liked it.
and "While it was flavorful, Ruination will no longer occasionally crash the game." That was funny. :P
It seemed like dungeon/arena hybrid from Hearthstone at first look. Seems funny also. I always loved Dungeon runs and playing them even after completed them. And also I spend most of my time of Hearthstone in arenas.
Seems like I will play all of my expeditions in Runeterra too. Seemed fun to play. I will look at it deeply tomorrow.
Someone might not like the limit of them but I liked it kind of a. It seemed like it is balancing the card ownage of people. I mean, We know that they will limit the buyable wildcards with real money. I feel like this expedition limits are also about making collection. And also I feel like they don't spare players as Arena players, Constructed players etc. They seemed like they want players to play every modes.
In beta of hearthstone, they were the same how they act for battlegrounds. They had changed cards, hero powers more often than now + there were no serious threats or rivals for the game.
Considering battlegrounds are in beta and there are already succeed auto-chess games around, they have to do that. I don't think they changed their policy of nerfing/balancing. It is just a must for now.
In my opinion they will stop that after the mode finished its beta status.
If you are interested in, u/rhemyst from reddit also made a simulation about set completion using Python who is asked that question and also promised to do maths about it :) ,
and here is the post and the results; All are quote from the post itself and thanks to u/rhemyst from Reddit again.
I used it compute the average progression values for several "involvement levels" and compute the set completion over 4 month.
The system makes several assumptions:
Collection starts absolutely empty
You save you shards for champions, then epics, then rares, etc...
You always spend your wildcards, even on commons and rares. It's not optimal in terms of progression, but I believe it's more realistic to assume most people will not want to sit on 50+ wildcards until they can just complete a whole rarity level at once.
You always level your vault to a given level every single week.
I used the "upgrade" values provided by Riot in the above thread. Those could change.
I tested various "involvement levels", with various properties:
Casual: level 6 vault every week. Vault gets less efficient after level 6, unless you reach level 10
Serious: level 10 vault every week. This also means about 1 region every month.
Pro: level 13 vault every week
According to u/herazalila, the above levels represent about 2h, 4h30 and 18h per week.
Whale: buys 3 epic and 3 champion wildcards every week (that's about 12€)
Dolphin: buys 1 epic and 1 champion wildcards every week
Fish: never buys anything
Here are the set completion, as percentage, over the course of 4 months. The line in bold is the example given by Riot : by leveling the vault to 10 every week, you get to about 75 completion after 4 month, i.e. when a new set is released. This would indicated that my simulation is accurate.
EDIT: thank you all for you comments. I need to clarify a few things before you look at those numbers.
Like I said, I ignored the prologue, tutorial and the possibility to buy a starter set. Those the bellow number should thus be a bit higher. I can redo the simulation when the have the exact data for it, during the next beta. EDIT: assuming I got the right data, with the prologue and starter set you'd reach 75% in 12 weeks as a Serious Fish.
On the other hand, my simulation does not account for the fact that when leveling a region, you only gain cards from that region. Which means that you are more likely to get duplicates, and that slows you down a bit. So those numbers below should be a bit lower.
But, at the same time, it means that the "completion percentage" is actually higher for the regions you leveled. Values below are only computed on the total set.
I used the region rewards order provided by Riot in their blog post. Those rewards are sorted in value. In practice, regions rewards are not sorted (you get some very nice rewards in the early levels). In the grand scheme of things, it doesn't change much. In practice, it means the beginning of your progression can be faster.
Overall, you can always add or remove a few points from those numbers depending on how you level regions, how you spend your shards, etc... It's just a broad estimate.
I believe there are many reasons why Blizzard simply doesn't add a 10th class.
We already have Death Knights cards in the game (through Arfus and The Lich King) so adding them in as a class would also be a bit confusing and obscure. True that Monk and Demon Hunter don't have this problem, but they still have all of the other problems.
The biggest and most foremost is retroactive presence. In other words, they'd have to add about 140+ cards to the game just for that one class to make up for the difference between other classes, and they'd need to add them to every set with the same distribution as the other classes, which in turn, will also affect pack openings for every set. In the present day, do you design the class as if was there the whole time and follow old expansion rules, or as if it's now just being added? They'd also have to add new rewards to the old adventures, and they'd need to add a 10th class to create for things like Dungeon Run and the final Lich King battle. What about Mean Streets of Gadgetzan? Do they join an existing crime family and offset the 3-3-3 balance, or do they not join one at all and feel out of place with the other 9 classes?
Another problem that arises when making a 10th class is the design of the class. What Hero Power will it have? What mechanics will it have? How do you make it different than other classes? These problems are all extremely prominent in the community of people who try to make custom classes. They'd basically have to go through that whole slew of figuring things out from the bottom up again, that the fan community also does.
They'd also need to completely redesign the menus to accommodate for the new class.
As much as I love custom classes, adding a 10th class to the game is not very practical or easy, and there's not that much benefit to doing so.
If they decide to add them in some time, I don't think that they need to add older expansion and adventure cards for the class. I mean, standard makes it easier. it can be unbalanced for wild but at some year's start, I think that new expansion's cards can be enough for a new class.
I agree completely with you except the stuff I mentioned above. Just wanted to say that.
You are right in that it is grammatically correct, but it is not consistent with other Hearthstone cards.
Still there is not any inconsistency. "if you're holding a dragon, Give it Divine Shield." and "Give it Divine Shield if you are holding a dragon." are same sentences. There is not any ambiguity.
They are both the same sentence, and they both mean the same thing, but the way the sentence is formatted is different than on the other cards, and is therefore, an inconsistency.
What you are doing here is finding fault with anything blizzard do. It is just funny how you defend yourself with a meaningless sentence differencies between cards. It is not like the difference between "Adapt 2 times" "adapt, then adapt" or " adapt twice". It is just same sentences in different order, doesn't even mislead people.
Why can't they just stay consistent with the way they write the text.
Why switch "if you're holding a Dragon" to AFTER the effect now?
Love your work, Blizzard... 🙄
It just works how the text describes. If you are not holding a dragon it just gives +1/+2 to a minion. If there is a dragon in your hand it also gives divine shield.
Sorry but there is no inconsistency here.
The card will always give a minion +1/+2 whether or not you are holding a dragon. But it will only give divine shield if you are holding a dragon, so I should think it would read "Give a minion +1/+2. If you are holding a dragon, give it Divine Shield" but instead it says "Give a minion +1/+2. Give it divine shield if you are holding a dragon".
If this card was consistent with other dragon cards it would say 'if you're holding a dragon' before the ability that wants you to be holding a dragon, but this card says 'if you're holding a dragon' after the ability.
I am not 100% sure if this is accurate, this is just how I think it should work.
we'd said same things already. If you look awarely, there is a dot after +1/+2. It basically has 2 effects in 1 spell and "If you're holding a dragon" part is still before the effect which is about holding dragon, that's the divine shield part.
They taught us "if" sentences as they are same when you say "if I can come home earlier, we might go to the cinema" or "We might go to the cinema if I can come home earlier." So I get it like there is no inconsistency here.
You are right in that it is grammatically correct, but it is not consistent with other Hearthstone cards.
Still there is not any inconsistency. "if you're holding a dragon, Give it Divine Shield." and "Give it Divine Shield if you are holding a dragon." are same sentences. There is not any ambiguity.
Why can't they just stay consistent with the way they write the text.
Why switch "if you're holding a Dragon" to AFTER the effect now?
Love your work, Blizzard... 🙄
It just works how the text describes. If you are not holding a dragon it just gives +1/+2 to a minion. If there is a dragon in your hand it also gives divine shield.
Sorry but there is no inconsistency here.
The card will always give a minion +1/+2 whether or not you are holding a dragon. But it will only give divine shield if you are holding a dragon, so I should think it would read "Give a minion +1/+2. If you are holding a dragon, give it Divine Shield" but instead it says "Give a minion +1/+2. Give it divine shield if you are holding a dragon".
If this card was consistent with other dragon cards it would say 'if you're holding a dragon' before the ability that wants you to be holding a dragon, but this card says 'if you're holding a dragon' after the ability.
I am not 100% sure if this is accurate, this is just how I think it should work.
we'd said same things already. If you look awarely, there is a dot after +1/+2. It basically has 2 effects in 1 spell and "If you're holding a dragon" part is still before the effect which is about holding dragon, that's the divine shield part.
They taught us "if" sentences as they are same when you say "if I can come home earlier, we might go to the cinema" or "We might go to the cinema if I can come home earlier." So I get it like there is no inconsistency here.
I don't know, you might be right but i think "set" mechanic works same with every other aspects of the game.
with Mojomaster Zihi your mana ends up empty because it is a 6-mana card and you pay those manas for playing it. It is pretty normal that you have ended up with empty crystals when you played it at turn 6 or playing it at turn 10 after spending your remaining 4 mana.
I still think that after playing Nozdormu the Timeless, you will have 6 or 10 mana because it doesn't say they will be empty.
Game works like; You have now 4 mana, You played Nozdormu the Timeless and paid 4 mana, Trigger its battlecry, Set both players mana to 10, Summon 8/8 body. It can even set your filled mana to 10 but it won't because we have an example of Mojomaster Zihi, which shows the spent mana for card itself remains after it is played. When you play Mojomaster Zihi at 10 mana, you ended up with 1 empty and 4 filled mana crystals.
Think about Alexstrasza, It sets the Health to 15 and it is highlighted that the health she set is "remaining" so it doesn't change the maximum health like Amara, Warden of Hope.
I'm %80 sure that you will have 6 mana to spend after playing Nozdormu the Timeless.
Otherwise, It should have been texted like "Set both players mana to 10, they are empty crystals." or sth. like that.
Huge changes, but really.
I would like to see how this will effect the existing decks. It seems like I need to tweak my own decks. Especially the ones with Kalista, Thresh and Lux.
Weird change for Lux tho, Seems like buff and nerf at the same time. I guess it is more useful then the older one.
I can finally make a Shadow Isles/Demacia deck with Kalista, Lucian and Senna, Sentinel of Light
I liked the spell changes of Burst to Fast, Fast to Slow and also some spell and unit changes from Deal all to deal units only. Especially Intimidating Roar in Yasuo decks. It was needed in my opinion.
Liked Withering Wail change too. It is not a dead card in some situations after this change.
I don't think that Garen, Draven, Shen nerfs will affect their playrate. Garen might even be more playable with this change since it isn't a buildaround card like, for example Draven. Draven seems still ok with this change. It is a Discard/aggro card after all.
I hated She Who Wanders in first preview and I still hate her after her new mana cost. It doesn't change anything. Units to Followers seems reasonable but still takes a huge advantage among other strategies. Most of the champions, especially aggro ones can't answer this huge threat along. Sorry but I didn't like the change of her. In my opinion, She must be able to obliterate the units on play, not hands. Let's see how she who wins will be after this change.
Ah and, I had tried to make Mageseeker Investigator work and liked her design. I really disliked her change. Let's see how a tech card she will be.
Edit: I have yet read all and watched the video and see that we can see which champions the opponent has in decks ? That's great, I guess ? I mean, It may help for mulligans. Liked it.
and "While it was flavorful, Ruination will no longer occasionally crash the game." That was funny. :P
It seemed like dungeon/arena hybrid from Hearthstone at first look. Seems funny also. I always loved Dungeon runs and playing them even after completed them. And also I spend most of my time of Hearthstone in arenas.
Seems like I will play all of my expeditions in Runeterra too. Seemed fun to play. I will look at it deeply tomorrow.
Someone might not like the limit of them but I liked it kind of a. It seemed like it is balancing the card ownage of people. I mean, We know that they will limit the buyable wildcards with real money. I feel like this expedition limits are also about making collection. And also I feel like they don't spare players as Arena players, Constructed players etc. They seemed like they want players to play every modes.
It seems it doesn't work with new deckbuilder. I've tried to link Dawn and Dusk and Anivia and they didn't seem linked.
Edit: I've linked them here same with in my deck, they work as intended but didn't work for deck guide.
https://outof.cards/legends-of-runeterra/decks/25-karmaanivia-combo
You can see here that they didn't work for deck guide.
Yay, Thanks for this ! That's what I was waiting for.
This will be great for me becuse i need a deck container. :)
I bet one of the changed card is that the obliterate card She Who Wanders iirc, yasuo too maybe.
In beta of hearthstone, they were the same how they act for battlegrounds. They had changed cards, hero powers more often than now + there were no serious threats or rivals for the game.
Considering battlegrounds are in beta and there are already succeed auto-chess games around, they have to do that. I don't think they changed their policy of nerfing/balancing. It is just a must for now.
In my opinion they will stop that after the mode finished its beta status.
If you are interested in, u/rhemyst from reddit also made a simulation about set completion using Python who is asked that question and also promised to do maths about it :) ,
Here is the link; https://www.reddit.com/r/LegendsOfRuneterra/comments/dtnizg/a_simulation_of_set_completion_for_various_levels/
and here is the post and the results; All are quote from the post itself and thanks to u/rhemyst from Reddit again.
I used it compute the average progression values for several "involvement levels" and compute the set completion over 4 month.
The system makes several assumptions:
Collection starts absolutely empty
You save you shards for champions, then epics, then rares, etc...
You always spend your wildcards, even on commons and rares. It's not optimal in terms of progression, but I believe it's more realistic to assume most people will not want to sit on 50+ wildcards until they can just complete a whole rarity level at once.
You always level your vault to a given level every single week.
I used the "upgrade" values provided by Riot in the above thread. Those could change.
I tested various "involvement levels", with various properties:
Casual: level 6 vault every week. Vault gets less efficient after level 6, unless you reach level 10
Serious: level 10 vault every week. This also means about 1 region every month.
Pro: level 13 vault every week
According to u/herazalila, the above levels represent about 2h, 4h30 and 18h per week.
Whale: buys 3 epic and 3 champion wildcards every week (that's about 12€)
Dolphin: buys 1 epic and 1 champion wildcards every week
Fish: never buys anything
Here are the set completion, as percentage, over the course of 4 months. The line in bold is the example given by Riot : by leveling the vault to 10 every week, you get to about 75 completion after 4 month, i.e. when a new set is released. This would indicated that my simulation is accurate.
EDIT: thank you all for you comments. I need to clarify a few things before you look at those numbers.
Like I said, I ignored the prologue, tutorial and the possibility to buy a starter set. Those the bellow number should thus be a bit higher. I can redo the simulation when the have the exact data for it, during the next beta. EDIT: assuming I got the right data, with the prologue and starter set you'd reach 75% in 12 weeks as a Serious Fish.
On the other hand, my simulation does not account for the fact that when leveling a region, you only gain cards from that region. Which means that you are more likely to get duplicates, and that slows you down a bit. So those numbers below should be a bit lower.
But, at the same time, it means that the "completion percentage" is actually higher for the regions you leveled. Values below are only computed on the total set.
I used the region rewards order provided by Riot in their blog post. Those rewards are sorted in value. In practice, regions rewards are not sorted (you get some very nice rewards in the early levels). In the grand scheme of things, it doesn't change much. In practice, it means the beginning of your progression can be faster.
Overall, you can always add or remove a few points from those numbers depending on how you level regions, how you spend your shards, etc... It's just a broad estimate.
If they decide to add them in some time, I don't think that they need to add older expansion and adventure cards for the class. I mean, standard makes it easier. it can be unbalanced for wild but at some year's start, I think that new expansion's cards can be enough for a new class.
I agree completely with you except the stuff I mentioned above. Just wanted to say that.
pirates, guns, more pirates, more guns, sharks, everything about piracy and shipping and sea. :P
I hope Miss Fortune will be great card since she is one of my favorite champs.
But I guess Ionia will stay as my favorite region because of Karma and Akali. :)
What you are doing here is finding fault with anything blizzard do. It is just funny how you defend yourself with a meaningless sentence differencies between cards. It is not like the difference between "Adapt 2 times" "adapt, then adapt" or " adapt twice". It is just same sentences in different order, doesn't even mislead people.
Why are we arguing this? it is just silly.
Still there is not any inconsistency. "if you're holding a dragon, Give it Divine Shield." and "Give it Divine Shield if you are holding a dragon." are same sentences. There is not any ambiguity.
we'd said same things already. If you look awarely, there is a dot after +1/+2. It basically has 2 effects in 1 spell and "If you're holding a dragon" part is still before the effect which is about holding dragon, that's the divine shield part.
They taught us "if" sentences as they are same when you say "if I can come home earlier, we might go to the cinema" or "We might go to the cinema if I can come home earlier." So I get it like there is no inconsistency here.
ok
0-mana deal 3 damage to a minion summon 12/12 for shamans...
I don't know, you might be right but i think "set" mechanic works same with every other aspects of the game.
with Mojomaster Zihi your mana ends up empty because it is a 6-mana card and you pay those manas for playing it. It is pretty normal that you have ended up with empty crystals when you played it at turn 6 or playing it at turn 10 after spending your remaining 4 mana.
I still think that after playing Nozdormu the Timeless, you will have 6 or 10 mana because it doesn't say they will be empty.
Game works like; You have now 4 mana, You played Nozdormu the Timeless and paid 4 mana, Trigger its battlecry, Set both players mana to 10, Summon 8/8 body. It can even set your filled mana to 10 but it won't because we have an example of Mojomaster Zihi, which shows the spent mana for card itself remains after it is played. When you play Mojomaster Zihi at 10 mana, you ended up with 1 empty and 4 filled mana crystals.
Think about Alexstrasza, It sets the Health to 15 and it is highlighted that the health she set is "remaining" so it doesn't change the maximum health like Amara, Warden of Hope.
I'm %80 sure that you will have 6 mana to spend after playing Nozdormu the Timeless.
Otherwise, It should have been texted like "Set both players mana to 10, they are empty crystals." or sth. like that.
Downvote as you wish, it won't change the truth.
She is lifegiver, you can play stuff to fit it well. Lifegiving to the nature aswell for example, beasts etc.
Poor War Golem.
Yeah ! but tbh, I'm disappointed to see Alexstrasza there. It must be Deathwing, Mad Aspect that breaths, not hunter's dragon.
it is not just battlecry. Invoke means simply "add a lackey to your hand" for rogues. its Galakrond's hero power and you should read this card as,
"Deal 3 damage to an undamaged character(not a minion) and add a random lackey to your hand.)
Think that it costs 2 when you attach lackey generation to a neutral 1/1 beast; EVIL Cable Rat.
A neutral 1/1 beast costs 0; Snowflipper Penguin
Dealing 5 damage to an undamaged character costs 3; Shadow Strike
So this card is well-costed and fair enough in my opinion.
+ Backstab can't deal damage to face, this can. So you can't evaluate this card's damage dealing same as Backstab.
its balancing is like; 2 mana for "Deal 3 damage to an undamaged character" and 1 mana for "Invoke".
Dragons are cool, At least they are not pushing Beast druids anymore. :)