Tradeable cards might play a big role, since they draw a card without emptying your deck. We don't yet know enough of the set to be able to properly assess that route though.
They'll probably be included in the card dump, or at the very latest when the patch hits (which I'd guess is either tomorrow or Thursday). Either way we'll know about them long before the 3rd of August.
Aside from the fact hunter did have a card like this (Nine Lives), they've got 4 deathrattle classes to maintain these days. You can point to any support card and say it would be great in one of the other classes. Hopefully though they curate deathrattle archetypes that feel quite distinct in how they play, which in fairness they usually do an OK job at.
Btw, just from our avatar images, its pretty clear we each have a class we are biased towards...
People complain and campaign about other world issues all the time, and there's a significant overlap in the people who actually bother to try to improve each. So don't kid yourself into thinking the people down-voting you now aren't also concerned about racism, homophobia, climate change, the pandemic etc, just because the spotlight is currently on sexual harassment.
As for your own problems, I assure you they do not include having to wait 2 days to see a few Hearthstone cards that you won't be able to use for over a week anyway. So don't pretend to be a victim when you get a flood of down-votes for a comment that acts like the world's biggest non-issue is more important than the sexual harassment that continues to plague society.
----------------------------------------
By the way, even the best of us get a bunch of down-votes every so often, so people aren't attacking you personally. There's also room for lots of different world-views on this site, and you sound like a bit of a nihilist, which is fine. No one is trying to stifle that. What they do take issue with, however, is writing comments in a callous and offensive way. It is good take the time to either find a way to word it which doesn't have that problem. If there is no way of avoiding it being offensive, you are going to have to put in the effort to write a good justification, otherwise you're just asking for down-votes.
There's a difference between a (quasi-)mathematical definition of comparison, which was used in the first sentence to say X<<Y, and the colloquial definition used in the second sentence to say basically the same thing in a less formal way.
It was pretty awkward having the two uses so close together, I'll give you that, but the intended interpretation was actually consistent.
Overkill only triggers on your turn, but the minion doesn't actually have to do the attacking. That's why Linecracker works with BEEEES!!! in infinite armour druid.
We havent seen hunter, dhunter, and warrior's so heres to hoping.
Also Rogue. I was hoping they'd keep some questlines for the final stream. It would be awesome to have 3 or 4 decks where you actually play the quests and discover what they are as the stream progresses.
Yeah kinda blanked on rogue for some reason.
Team5 does have a habit of saving the best for last, so we'll see in a couple of days which has the honor of being what is considered either the most interesting or best of the lot.
My bet is on PlayHearthstone revealing the rogue quest later today, based on the teaser image looking like Scabbs' belt buckle. If Team5 are indeed revealing that one themselves, they might well have a lot to say about it.
I'm also going to recklessly bet that the rogue questline requires you to shuffle cards into your deck. That would then use Garrote, and also serve as the foundation of a Tradeable deck since that keyword does shuffle something in.
Anyway, as for whether the questlines seem too slow, that depends entirely on whether the meta is able to shift away from aggro (not completely gone though). It has been a while since slow strategies have worked, but they definitely have done in the past and can do again.
Yeah, I'm not really a fan of how unevenly they reveal cards for different classes. It doesn't have to be completely equal, but 7 warlock cards in the time rogue and DH saw 1 seems a bit extreme.
The good(?) news is I expect PlayHearthstone's reveal later today (the one that looks like a red orb with a half-cog around it, and looks suspiciously like Scabbs' belt buckle in his final artwork in https://playhearthstone.com/en-gb/news/23658052) will be the rogue questline, so hopefully we'll better see what the class is aiming for soon.
The downside is at the moment only the first copy's DR can ever work, but perhaps we'll have some copying mechanics in DH this expansion or sometime soon.
This crossed my mind too, but since that's one of rogue's party tricks I kind of hope not. Those two classes already share enough design space, so I'd rather DH didn't keep growing in the same direction as rogue.
I see it as the deathrattle almost never being useless. You can effectively guarantee you only draw 1 of them, giving you a 4 mana 4/3 that summons a 4/3 upon death. That would have been a high-roll for Piloted Shredder back in the day, so it stands to reason its still a solid card now in Standard.
The fact it is competing with rush minions in the 4 mana slot probably keeps it out of deathrattle decks, but it is at least better than those options when you don't need the rush, or when summoned on your opponent's turn (e.g. via Razorfen Beastmaster).
I suspect at least one class is going to be pushed towards a genuine 'tradeable' archetype and therefore would have enough to seriously consider running this. That's most likely going to be rogue, who they've been really quiet about so far, and tradeable naturally lines up with rogue mechanics and theme (draw, combo enablers, greed/coins->commerce->trade).
Hunter certainly has a knack for dodging nerfs, though I suppose that's separate from class design.
Anyway, I am all for slower hunter decks being pushed a little more, although like rogue I very much doubt they would ever truly qualify as 'control'. Rogue has always been my favourite class for its shenanigans in slow decks, and there have been times when hunter took second place for its slow decks too (often big beasts, which are sadly lacking in Standard). Even then though, the reason I liked those hunter decks was because it came alongside hunter's baseline aggressiveness, so it always felt like I was being proactive even when I was stalling. More defensive big-minion decks like warlock don't interest me at all.
I suppose where this is heading is that hunter should never lose sight of the option to smorc. It sounds laughably boring, and it kind of is when applied to a hyper-aggro deck, but it is also a large part of what sets hunter apart from other classes with similar archetypes. Maybe that only ends up mattering to casual players who don't mind playing non-meta decks, but at least that's something.
Agreed, it is clearly a way to restrict it to defensive archetypes. I guess the heavy-handed approach taken is quite unusual for HS, which would normally take the approach of associating the effect with a synergy instead, e.g. giving it: Battlecry: if you have restored health this turn, gain lifesteal.
I like this approach honestly. Defensive paladins are hardly things that we need to keep in check, so there is no reason to force them to jump through hoops to get the effect.
No, I think my assessment was fair. While 'rattle rogue has had a few looks over the years, the Boomsday -> DoD version (the 'Necrium' version I suppose) was designed from the ground up to be a 'cheese deck'. It was all about getting big deathrattles early and multiplying them.
Regardless of whether it fits with your idea of what a deathrattle deck looks like, the core of the deck was big deathrattles and deathrattle synergy cards. The deathrattles were not just some optional component like Brain Freeze is in spell mage.
It's difficult to make this compare well to Underlight Angling Rod, but I do respect the design of this, especially at a time when I'm worn down by what feels like 16 months of aggro. Is it worse than the Angling Rod most of the time? Yes. Is it better if you just want to spite (smite?) aggro? Yes.
The last time they tried to make deathrattle rogue work we had Necrium Apothecary dominating the meta, so 'rattle rogue hasn't had the track record of failure you make it sound like.
Hunter has had more hero power related cards than any class other than mage, so I'm not sure what your point is there. Besides, there's something I find deeply satisfying about pressing hunter's hero power, even if it is mechanically simple (and I'm rarely the aggro player).
I personally agree with Iksar, and I think an easily missed part of what he means is what hunter hasn't got, not just what it has. The weaknesses in class identity are just as important as the strengths, and hunter is one of the classes (along with rogue and druid) that has very well established weaknesses. Those weaknesses being so entrenched limits the range of archetypes the class can realistically play, but also means fewer card designs get wasted trying to make, say, control hunter a thing when it's never going to beat the traditional control classes at it.
I guess the point is that a fairly narrow class identity isn't necessarily a bad one. We have 10 classes, and they don't all need to be able to do everything, and nobody needs to enjoy all 10 classes either.
It's a pet peeve of mine to see people attaching the "evil" stereotype to Death Knight or Demon Hunter custom cards since neither class is actually inherently evil. In fact, most people that become Demon Hunters are actually very noble, who then turn into vigilantes.
I usually group DH and DK with warlock and rogue as the 'dark' classes. The characters themselves might have good intentions that are completely aligned with societal norms on what is 'good' and 'evil', but these classes are all built on using methods that are generally considered bad.
I think of it a lot like making ethical decisions at a micro vs macro level. Trying to save every individual life (micro) is ethically clean, but might not save as many lives as a macro decision like letting a town die to save a city. Even if the macro approach is mathematically better, it is often still treated as the unethical path because there was a morally questionable choice embedded in there. DH embodies this most closely (stop the Burning Legion at all costs, because everything will die otherwise anyway), but each of the 4 'dark' classes has something similar going on.
The assumption that the deck is that overload heavy may or may not be right. The neat thing about this having tradeable is that you can get away with having a smaller number of big overload cards, and just keep this if you actually have those around. Saying that another way: it won't ever become a dead card like build-around cards usually do, so you don't have to go so hard into building around it.
I also don't believe that you'd want hold onto this in every scenario besides imminent death. Dealing 3-6 damage just isn't always important. If the opponent stabilised and is sitting on 20+ health, you might need to dig for a different win condition.
Tradeable cards might play a big role, since they draw a card without emptying your deck. We don't yet know enough of the set to be able to properly assess that route though.
They'll probably be included in the card dump, or at the very latest when the patch hits (which I'd guess is either tomorrow or Thursday). Either way we'll know about them long before the 3rd of August.
Aside from the fact hunter did have a card like this (Nine Lives), they've got 4 deathrattle classes to maintain these days. You can point to any support card and say it would be great in one of the other classes. Hopefully though they curate deathrattle archetypes that feel quite distinct in how they play, which in fairness they usually do an OK job at.
Btw, just from our avatar images, its pretty clear we each have a class we are biased towards...
People complain and campaign about other world issues all the time, and there's a significant overlap in the people who actually bother to try to improve each. So don't kid yourself into thinking the people down-voting you now aren't also concerned about racism, homophobia, climate change, the pandemic etc, just because the spotlight is currently on sexual harassment.
As for your own problems, I assure you they do not include having to wait 2 days to see a few Hearthstone cards that you won't be able to use for over a week anyway. So don't pretend to be a victim when you get a flood of down-votes for a comment that acts like the world's biggest non-issue is more important than the sexual harassment that continues to plague society.
----------------------------------------
By the way, even the best of us get a bunch of down-votes every so often, so people aren't attacking you personally. There's also room for lots of different world-views on this site, and you sound like a bit of a nihilist, which is fine. No one is trying to stifle that. What they do take issue with, however, is writing comments in a callous and offensive way. It is good take the time to either find a way to word it which doesn't have that problem. If there is no way of avoiding it being offensive, you are going to have to put in the effort to write a good justification, otherwise you're just asking for down-votes.
There's a difference between a (quasi-)mathematical definition of comparison, which was used in the first sentence to say X<<Y, and the colloquial definition used in the second sentence to say basically the same thing in a less formal way.
It was pretty awkward having the two uses so close together, I'll give you that, but the intended interpretation was actually consistent.
Then I apologise, or welcome you to the Out of Cards community, depending on whether you are happy to have the account :)
Overkill only triggers on your turn, but the minion doesn't actually have to do the attacking. That's why Linecracker works with BEEEES!!! in infinite armour druid.
My bet is on PlayHearthstone revealing the rogue quest later today, based on the teaser image looking like Scabbs' belt buckle. If Team5 are indeed revealing that one themselves, they might well have a lot to say about it.
I'm also going to recklessly bet that the rogue questline requires you to shuffle cards into your deck. That would then use Garrote, and also serve as the foundation of a Tradeable deck since that keyword does shuffle something in.
Anyway, as for whether the questlines seem too slow, that depends entirely on whether the meta is able to shift away from aggro (not completely gone though). It has been a while since slow strategies have worked, but they definitely have done in the past and can do again.
Yeah, I'm not really a fan of how unevenly they reveal cards for different classes. It doesn't have to be completely equal, but 7 warlock cards in the time rogue and DH saw 1 seems a bit extreme.
The good(?) news is I expect PlayHearthstone's reveal later today (the one that looks like a red orb with a half-cog around it, and looks suspiciously like Scabbs' belt buckle in his final artwork in https://playhearthstone.com/en-gb/news/23658052) will be the rogue questline, so hopefully we'll better see what the class is aiming for soon.
This crossed my mind too, but since that's one of rogue's party tricks I kind of hope not. Those two classes already share enough design space, so I'd rather DH didn't keep growing in the same direction as rogue.
I see it as the deathrattle almost never being useless. You can effectively guarantee you only draw 1 of them, giving you a 4 mana 4/3 that summons a 4/3 upon death. That would have been a high-roll for Piloted Shredder back in the day, so it stands to reason its still a solid card now in Standard.
The fact it is competing with rush minions in the 4 mana slot probably keeps it out of deathrattle decks, but it is at least better than those options when you don't need the rush, or when summoned on your opponent's turn (e.g. via Razorfen Beastmaster).
I suspect at least one class is going to be pushed towards a genuine 'tradeable' archetype and therefore would have enough to seriously consider running this. That's most likely going to be rogue, who they've been really quiet about so far, and tradeable naturally lines up with rogue mechanics and theme (draw, combo enablers, greed/coins->commerce->trade).
Hunter certainly has a knack for dodging nerfs, though I suppose that's separate from class design.
Anyway, I am all for slower hunter decks being pushed a little more, although like rogue I very much doubt they would ever truly qualify as 'control'. Rogue has always been my favourite class for its shenanigans in slow decks, and there have been times when hunter took second place for its slow decks too (often big beasts, which are sadly lacking in Standard). Even then though, the reason I liked those hunter decks was because it came alongside hunter's baseline aggressiveness, so it always felt like I was being proactive even when I was stalling. More defensive big-minion decks like warlock don't interest me at all.
I suppose where this is heading is that hunter should never lose sight of the option to smorc. It sounds laughably boring, and it kind of is when applied to a hyper-aggro deck, but it is also a large part of what sets hunter apart from other classes with similar archetypes. Maybe that only ends up mattering to casual players who don't mind playing non-meta decks, but at least that's something.
Agreed, it is clearly a way to restrict it to defensive archetypes. I guess the heavy-handed approach taken is quite unusual for HS, which would normally take the approach of associating the effect with a synergy instead, e.g. giving it: Battlecry: if you have restored health this turn, gain lifesteal.
I like this approach honestly. Defensive paladins are hardly things that we need to keep in check, so there is no reason to force them to jump through hoops to get the effect.
No, I think my assessment was fair. While 'rattle rogue has had a few looks over the years, the Boomsday -> DoD version (the 'Necrium' version I suppose) was designed from the ground up to be a 'cheese deck'. It was all about getting big deathrattles early and multiplying them.
Regardless of whether it fits with your idea of what a deathrattle deck looks like, the core of the deck was big deathrattles and deathrattle synergy cards. The deathrattles were not just some optional component like Brain Freeze is in spell mage.
It's difficult to make this compare well to Underlight Angling Rod, but I do respect the design of this, especially at a time when I'm worn down by what feels like 16 months of aggro. Is it worse than the Angling Rod most of the time? Yes. Is it better if you just want to spite (smite?) aggro? Yes.
The last time they tried to make deathrattle rogue work we had Necrium Apothecary dominating the meta, so 'rattle rogue hasn't had the track record of failure you make it sound like.
Hunter has had more hero power related cards than any class other than mage, so I'm not sure what your point is there. Besides, there's something I find deeply satisfying about pressing hunter's hero power, even if it is mechanically simple (and I'm rarely the aggro player).
I personally agree with Iksar, and I think an easily missed part of what he means is what hunter hasn't got, not just what it has. The weaknesses in class identity are just as important as the strengths, and hunter is one of the classes (along with rogue and druid) that has very well established weaknesses. Those weaknesses being so entrenched limits the range of archetypes the class can realistically play, but also means fewer card designs get wasted trying to make, say, control hunter a thing when it's never going to beat the traditional control classes at it.
I guess the point is that a fairly narrow class identity isn't necessarily a bad one. We have 10 classes, and they don't all need to be able to do everything, and nobody needs to enjoy all 10 classes either.
I usually group DH and DK with warlock and rogue as the 'dark' classes. The characters themselves might have good intentions that are completely aligned with societal norms on what is 'good' and 'evil', but these classes are all built on using methods that are generally considered bad.
I think of it a lot like making ethical decisions at a micro vs macro level. Trying to save every individual life (micro) is ethically clean, but might not save as many lives as a macro decision like letting a town die to save a city. Even if the macro approach is mathematically better, it is often still treated as the unethical path because there was a morally questionable choice embedded in there. DH embodies this most closely (stop the Burning Legion at all costs, because everything will die otherwise anyway), but each of the 4 'dark' classes has something similar going on.
The assumption that the deck is that overload heavy may or may not be right. The neat thing about this having tradeable is that you can get away with having a smaller number of big overload cards, and just keep this if you actually have those around. Saying that another way: it won't ever become a dead card like build-around cards usually do, so you don't have to go so hard into building around it.
I also don't believe that you'd want hold onto this in every scenario besides imminent death. Dealing 3-6 damage just isn't always important. If the opponent stabilised and is sitting on 20+ health, you might need to dig for a different win condition.