Ah, between this and Condemn (Rank 1), I think I see what Blizzard is doing with these upgradable cards. A 2/2 Rush on turn 2 is wonderful sometimes, but not consistently enough to include in your deck. A 4/4 Rush on turn 5 and a 6/6 Rush on turn 10 are likewise potentially great but inconsistent. But if you have all three of those options in a single card? Well, maybe then it is consistent enough to include after all!
This seems like a clever design approach. This card is never the strongest, but it’s also not going to be a dead draw if you get it on the wrong turn. Hopefully this helps the game focus more on efficient use of the right tools at the right time, rather than a race to draw your OP cards before your opponent does.
I love Secret Paladin so much, but this card alone won’t make it viable. SPs play lots of cards that are good for 1 mana, but “good for 1 mana” won’t win you the game.
What the archetype needs most is good card draw or generation so that you can keep pumping out those 1-mana spells. (That’s why Shadowjeweler Hanar gets more value out of Paladin Secrets than Paladins do.) I’m still hoping to see this soon.
If Paladins do get the card draw they need, then Smythe will offer great support. As I mentioned about, part of the fun of Secret Paladin is getting lots of secrets on the board, so this will generate lots of tokens.
Part of Priest’s core identity seems to be “a variery of individual and board-wide removal spells,.” To use a Priest effectively, you’ll need to choose the right tools for the situation.
Most reactions to the card seem to be based on whether it’s good or bad in specific situations. But this card doesn’t have to take care of everything, it just has to have a role as one of five removal tools in a deck. As such, I think it will be an ok card. As a cheap AOE that scales through the game, it has its own purpose. I expect it to be solid in some metas and ignored in others.
For what it’s worth, I’ve played 6 ladder games since my last post: I saw 3 different Kindred decks, 2 different Azir, and one good old-fashioned Miss Fortune-Gangplank. That’s definitely not my usual experience, of course.
I think that LoR’s meta is a lot more varied than Hearthstone’s or (from what I hear) Magic’s, and it is also a lot more feasible to climb with off-meta decks in the game. I also don’t want crazy power-creep, so I’m fine if the expansions that come every two months only change things somewhat.
That said, I’m also worried about how long we’ve started going without nerfs that are obviously needed, and this game can be so time-intensive that breaks can be a good idea. I stopped playing for most of the second Targon expansion. The only thing I really disagreed with you onwas whether the new expansion is noticeable, but I don’t want to make a big deal out of that.
Good luck, whether you end up taking a break or not. My break was definitely healthy for me, and I’m playing the game more than ever since I returned.
I love the fact that Runeterra’s expansions add a lot of new viable things to the game without invalidating the old things. It’s a very tricky balancing act. And the meta absolutely feels different now even though some old decks have remained powerful.
Yes, some nerfs are needed. And yes, it can be healthy to take a break from the game if you need to. But you can definitely tell that an expansion just came out.
Thanks, Flux. I hope that my comment emphasized that I appreciate the articles and didn’t sound too whiny :)
I’ve commented corrections in several articles before. I don’t do it too often because I don’t want to be annoying. But I’ll be happy to continue if you appreciate the feedback.
The effort to shorten what Dean said only made it less clear.
Save that comment. You could re-use it on every one of these articles :)
I don’t want to sound cynical, because I really appreciate the effort that goes into collecting these tweets and putting them in one convenient place. However, the summaries can be confusing or incomplete. The full transcripts are well worth reading (and not that long).
Maybe this varies by region or age, but I had no trouble reading this the right way. And even trying to see it the way you’re describing, it’s hard for me to think of “x-style” as code for porn. “XXX-style”, sure, but even that sounds weird to me. (Why would you say “style” there?) A single “X” can mean a million things on its own, but almost never means porn.
Doom in the Tomb went on too long. If they do another one like it, it has to be shorter.
I thought that was exactly what they’re doing with the card unnerfs coming before the rotation. Overpowered decks of the past return for a short time, but hopefully not for long enough to get boring or for the meta to settle on the most OP one.
The thing I’ll enjoy most is the new expansion, but since we’re a week into the current one, I’m not exactly looking forward to another yet.
The Lab of Legends update will be exciting. Its the first solo CCG experience I’ve enjoyed in a couple years, but the same 9 enemies are getting old. I’m looking forward to seeing what they can add.
If a deck from yesterday has no equivalent in today’s list, how should we take that? Does that mean the deck didn’t work out and wasn’t worth refining? I’m specifically thinking of the solo Demacia deck. I haven’t seen it on ladder, and I’m wondering if it will be worth crafting or not.
Yeah. It’s a lot. IF you’re going to play that much anyway and if you’re willing to spend money on the game, then the pass is a no-brainer. The rewards are a better deal than any other way to spend money, even if you only care about a handful of the items you’re getting.
But if you’re not going to play that much otherwise, then the time cost is significant. I pushed to finish the Spirit Blossom festival last year, and I think that’s why I burned out on the game for a while. Right now I’m playing more than ever, so I think this will be a great festival for me. But if you don’t see me commenting on anything next month, you’ll know they drove me away again.
I assume if you managed to get two copies of Kindred on the board, each one would mark the different enemies. (Just like a “stun the strongest unit” effect always targets the strongest unstunned unit.) Also, if you duplicate a marked minion, the mark would be copied over.
Those are edge cases, but I think the wording they chose for the card covers them clearly. (Maybe instead they could have said something like “marked units die at the end of the round”. It’s still clear what happens if two units are marked, but it doesn’t make you stop and wonder the first time you read it.)
You’re right. I was thinking that the fact that you can’t include They Who Endure. But since the whole point of this is replacing that card, I guess that’s not a problem.
That said, I don’t think the top Nasus decks will look very much like the top Endure decks. With Endure, you care about your own units dying, regardless of which player killed them. With Nasus, you want to be doing the killing regardless of which side the unit is on. There may be some commonality, but I expect some big differences too.
I agree, and I think it will be interesting to see what comes out of this. The Endure archetype should stay valid, but since that depends on two regions it may not be a good starting point for Nasus. Will a Shurima-Shadow Isles variant work out, or will Nasus find a more aggressive approach that depends on slaying opponents?
They Who Endure have Overwhelm, which is probably the best keyword for a unit like this. Nasus may end up being stronger, but without Overwhelm it’s not a sure thing.
Ah, between this and Condemn (Rank 1), I think I see what Blizzard is doing with these upgradable cards. A 2/2 Rush on turn 2 is wonderful sometimes, but not consistently enough to include in your deck. A 4/4 Rush on turn 5 and a 6/6 Rush on turn 10 are likewise potentially great but inconsistent. But if you have all three of those options in a single card? Well, maybe then it is consistent enough to include after all!
This seems like a clever design approach. This card is never the strongest, but it’s also not going to be a dead draw if you get it on the wrong turn. Hopefully this helps the game focus more on efficient use of the right tools at the right time, rather than a race to draw your OP cards before your opponent does.
I love Secret Paladin so much, but this card alone won’t make it viable. SPs play lots of cards that are good for 1 mana, but “good for 1 mana” won’t win you the game.
What the archetype needs most is good card draw or generation so that you can keep pumping out those 1-mana spells. (That’s why Shadowjeweler Hanar gets more value out of Paladin Secrets than Paladins do.) I’m still hoping to see this soon.
If Paladins do get the card draw they need, then Smythe will offer great support. As I mentioned about, part of the fun of Secret Paladin is getting lots of secrets on the board, so this will generate lots of tokens.
Part of Priest’s core identity seems to be “a variery of individual and board-wide removal spells,.” To use a Priest effectively, you’ll need to choose the right tools for the situation.
Most reactions to the card seem to be based on whether it’s good or bad in specific situations. But this card doesn’t have to take care of everything, it just has to have a role as one of five removal tools in a deck. As such, I think it will be an ok card. As a cheap AOE that scales through the game, it has its own purpose. I expect it to be solid in some metas and ignored in others.
I’m looking forward to my first infinite loop of this card and Plagiarize.
For what it’s worth, I’ve played 6 ladder games since my last post: I saw 3 different Kindred decks, 2 different Azir, and one good old-fashioned Miss Fortune-Gangplank. That’s definitely not my usual experience, of course.
I think that LoR’s meta is a lot more varied than Hearthstone’s or (from what I hear) Magic’s, and it is also a lot more feasible to climb with off-meta decks in the game. I also don’t want crazy power-creep, so I’m fine if the expansions that come every two months only change things somewhat.
That said, I’m also worried about how long we’ve started going without nerfs that are obviously needed, and this game can be so time-intensive that breaks can be a good idea. I stopped playing for most of the second Targon expansion. The only thing I really disagreed with you onwas whether the new expansion is noticeable, but I don’t want to make a big deal out of that.
Good luck, whether you end up taking a break or not. My break was definitely healthy for me, and I’m playing the game more than ever since I returned.
I love the fact that Runeterra’s expansions add a lot of new viable things to the game without invalidating the old things. It’s a very tricky balancing act. And the meta absolutely feels different now even though some old decks have remained powerful.
Yes, some nerfs are needed. And yes, it can be healthy to take a break from the game if you need to. But you can definitely tell that an expansion just came out.
That’s all fair. I’d add Wiggly Burblefish to the list alongside Fiora and TF.
Thanks, Flux. I hope that my comment emphasized that I appreciate the articles and didn’t sound too whiny :)
I’ve commented corrections in several articles before. I don’t do it too often because I don’t want to be annoying. But I’ll be happy to continue if you appreciate the feedback.
Save that comment. You could re-use it on every one of these articles :)
I don’t want to sound cynical, because I really appreciate the effort that goes into collecting these tweets and putting them in one convenient place. However, the summaries can be confusing or incomplete. The full transcripts are well worth reading (and not that long).
Maybe this varies by region or age, but I had no trouble reading this the right way. And even trying to see it the way you’re describing, it’s hard for me to think of “x-style” as code for porn. “XXX-style”, sure, but even that sounds weird to me. (Why would you say “style” there?) A single “X” can mean a million things on its own, but almost never means porn.
I thought that was exactly what they’re doing with the card unnerfs coming before the rotation. Overpowered decks of the past return for a short time, but hopefully not for long enough to get boring or for the meta to settle on the most OP one.
The thing I’ll enjoy most is the new expansion, but since we’re a week into the current one, I’m not exactly looking forward to another yet.
The Lab of Legends update will be exciting. Its the first solo CCG experience I’ve enjoyed in a couple years, but the same 9 enemies are getting old. I’m looking forward to seeing what they can add.
As someone who played mostly Token Druid last month, I can assure you that Aggro Rogue is very beatable.
However, I’m someone who’s playing mostly no Hearthstone this month, and I blame that on how boring the current builds of Token Druid are.
If a deck from yesterday has no equivalent in today’s list, how should we take that? Does that mean the deck didn’t work out and wasn’t worth refining? I’m specifically thinking of the solo Demacia deck. I haven’t seen it on ladder, and I’m wondering if it will be worth crafting or not.
Yeah. It’s a lot. IF you’re going to play that much anyway and if you’re willing to spend money on the game, then the pass is a no-brainer. The rewards are a better deal than any other way to spend money, even if you only care about a handful of the items you’re getting.
But if you’re not going to play that much otherwise, then the time cost is significant. I pushed to finish the Spirit Blossom festival last year, and I think that’s why I burned out on the game for a while. Right now I’m playing more than ever, so I think this will be a great festival for me. But if you don’t see me commenting on anything next month, you’ll know they drove me away again.
I assume if you managed to get two copies of Kindred on the board, each one would mark the different enemies. (Just like a “stun the strongest unit” effect always targets the strongest unstunned unit.) Also, if you duplicate a marked minion, the mark would be copied over.
Those are edge cases, but I think the wording they chose for the card covers them clearly. (Maybe instead they could have said something like “marked units die at the end of the round”. It’s still clear what happens if two units are marked, but it doesn’t make you stop and wonder the first time you read it.)
No. The first slaying each round is a 2-for-1, and your opponent has ways to play around that.
You’re right. I was thinking that the fact that you can’t include They Who Endure. But since the whole point of this is replacing that card, I guess that’s not a problem.
That said, I don’t think the top Nasus decks will look very much like the top Endure decks. With Endure, you care about your own units dying, regardless of which player killed them. With Nasus, you want to be doing the killing regardless of which side the unit is on. There may be some commonality, but I expect some big differences too.
I agree, and I think it will be interesting to see what comes out of this. The Endure archetype should stay valid, but since that depends on two regions it may not be a good starting point for Nasus. Will a Shurima-Shadow Isles variant work out, or will Nasus find a more aggressive approach that depends on slaying opponents?
They Who Endure have Overwhelm, which is probably the best keyword for a unit like this. Nasus may end up being stronger, but without Overwhelm it’s not a sure thing.