This card is by far basically cheating. Not only it allows a player to replay any specific card more times than it should be, but also reduces the mana cost of the card.
Conniving Conman has 2 great benefits of great value. The advantage gained by playing it is so strong that other decks could not possibly compete with it.
In short, this card is BS. Mana cheating is just terrible. Most problems in the past meta were usually caused by discounted 0 mana card.
Except we are not dealing with a card meant to play on curve.
So of course a 4 mana card that is not played turn 4 is stronger than one who can and will.
You don’t have that notion and this is why you’re wrong.
Being stronger than ordinary 4-cost cards is totally different from being too strong.
Mana cheat is and always will be one of the most terrible mechanic in Hearthstone.
Except that it isn’t.
That type of cards have to escalate with what you play and then you have more mana cheat on the other side of the coins too.
Sincerely …
It is in line with the BS this game make us pass by.
so is a win more card and there is nor eason to nerf it ?
"more than should be "as far as i know means " more than needed to win "
4 mana 4/4 Battlecry: Cast Tsunami or Sunset Volley.
Fair and balanced. Considering they’re both very high impact spells, they cost a lot of mana. They can only be cast in the late game, and certainly not turn 5-6 consistently…
/s
I can deal with my opponent mana-cheating out some sort of busted OP wombo combo by turn “infinitely less than it should be,” because that’s exactly what I was going to do to on my very next turn.
Like, seriously. Real talk here for a minute: EVERYONE except Priest has some sort of busted over-the-top shenanigans - and the only reason Priest has none of their own, is because they steal YOURS when you play against them, like some kind of CCG Jujitsu.
Now you can complain that you don’t like this type of meta, and that’s a valid critique as far as it goes. But if we’re going to look at this objectively, the worst mechanic in all of Hearthstone is EASILY the emote system.
Remember now, audibly expressing remorse had to be permanently stricken from the game because it was just that soul crushingly unbearable. You can’t possibly come up with a worse mechanic than that.
Yeah it just… replaying the last big thing you played is dumb. Like whether it’s “balanced” or not, it’s just… some easy mode mana cheat. It’s not nearly difficult enough to use for how enormous the payoff is.
No. I mean more times than it should be allowed. Perhaps, my word of choice is incorrect. I apologize for my English skill here.
Well, Hearthstone cards are designed based on their rarity and a number of it in the deck. For examples, Legendary cards are super strong but a player can put only 1 instance of it in the deck, so that it is likely to be played only 1 time and it is harder to be drawn.
Conniving Conman eleminates these restriction. It reduces the cost of high mana cards, and also allows them to be played more times than they are designed for.
People tend to confuse “impact” with “strength” when it comes to CCG’s. The concepts are related, but still functionally disparate. And furthermore, they tend to associate that with rarity, which has nothing to do with anything other than making money.
Look, the goal of playing the game is to win. Right? That’s the point of any game in HS. You win when your opponent is reduced to less than 1 health, or when a card otherwise specifically states you win.
A card’s “Strength” refers to its overall ability to help you win. For example, Sunset Volley is very strong. It deals 10 damage randomly divided among all legal enemy targets and it summons a random 10-cost minion. VERY strong. It can win the game outright very easily.
A card’s “Impact” refers to how much it affects the state of the game. For example, Sunset Volley is also very impactful. You get a 10-cost body AND you potentially remove several opposing threats. Very impactful AND very strong.
Compare that to Naturalize. It’s an old Druid card, I think it might even be banned in Wild, I’m not sure. Destroy an enemy’s minion, force them to draw two cards. Not very powerful - it won’t win the game outright - but HIGHLY impactful. It got banned from Standard before the “standard / wild split” was even a thing, because it was THAT impactful. Not a very “powerful” card, but it reshaped the game when it was played.
Now think about Leeroy Jenkins. VERY powerful, but not very “impactful.” You either play him as the wincon or you don’t bother casting him at all. He does nothing helpful if he doesn’t win the game the turn you play him.
NOW compare all of that to Conman. Conman’s not very strong innately AND he’s not very impactful innately. It’s just a body that repeats the last spell you cast. It’s that “last thing” that needs to be strong enough, or impactful enough, or both, to warrant slotting and casting the Conman in the first place.
None of this has anything to do with card rarity. That’s just a method of creating artificial scarcity to make money. Remember now, this is a DIGITAL card game. The entire business model revolves around enticing people to chase powerful cards/combos. They could make Unkilliax a common if they wanted to and it would make no functional difference as long as they restricted it to 1-per-deck; however, if they did that, then it would be far easier to pull it in a pack, and it would be far less expensive to craft it.
“Data” has no scarcity inherent to it, unlike physical cards that, even if printed at equal odds, will still differ in terms of raw geographical dissemination. They could make card collecting entirely deterministic if they wanted to - pay X amount of money and get the entire collection guaranteed. They choose NOT to do that because the random odds, that THEY created on purpose, equates to exponentially - potentially INFINITELY - higher revenue.
Rarity, Strength, and Impact. Three things that people cross and conflate and confuse with each other all the time.
Conman is the second-most-common rarity, with no real strength and whose impact - the sole reason you’d ever play it - requires minimal setup. You nerf the setup, you kill the card. You nerf the card, you still have the setup cards themselves which are the REAL problem in this context.
But even more than that, though? The real issue? EVERYONE from EVERY class has this kind of stuff going on. These kinds of threads aren’t complaining about Mage in truth, they’re complaining about Meta. Some people (many people who post here, apparently) hate the meta. That’s not Mage’s fault. That’s not Conman’s fault either.
Everybody knows that it will be nerfed if it makes the new expansion look bad. Just wait. Blizzard will nerf old cards to sell new ones.
Setup and payoffs are dumbed down yet extremely powerful nowadays. Sigil of Skydiving on 4 leads to an uninterruptible Wave of Nostalgia synergy on 5. Lamplighter dealing 10+ damage as reward for just playing your deck normally. I’m still salty about Gemtosser being a 3 mana hyper-flexible C’thun. List goes on ad nauseam.
Sure thing but people hating on this should be playing other game for the simple fact that this list is so long that it would take years to nerf everything even if blizzard wanted.
Con man is only a problem in mage specifically. Always felt luke this guy should have a cap on what cost spell/minion that can be repeated. A 4 mana tsunami with a 4/4 after you already scammed the first tsunami turn 4 or 5 is not ok.
Not even going to explain why it repeating the mage orb is wrong. Its obvious, or at least should be.
I mean, sure. As far as it goes, in a complete vacuum devoid of any context, then yes I agree that two orbs in a row is just stupid irredeemable garbage.
Honestly though? If the FIRST one launched at me didn’t end the game outright, AND I still let them come back for a second one? That’s MY fault more than anything else.
Not really.
How do you “let” someone come back for a second one? The first one just did probably like 15 damage to your face, filled the board, and cleared your board. What if you’re playing a deck that doesn’t end the game reliably before turn 11?
Like so much of the rhetoric about this game is like… it’s okay for one player to have a game ending play on turn 9 that they just get to have without having to play intelligently. (Sequence multiple cards in some unique way, or need to find a specific combo) But then the other player has a higher threshold of needing to play well in order to stop it.
Playing 2 cards in sequence should not be a game ending play on it’s own regardless of what else is going on, but it totally is. It’s awful game design. There should be an ebb and flow to this stuff.
How about 4? 5? 6 of them? Its such garbage design
In your example, I would have just conceded. Because I literally would not be able to come back. And, that’s my point here - there functionally WASN’T a second orb. Just call it Fist of the North Star because “I was already dead.”
So really, it was ONE orb that killed it, and the SECOND one was just overkill that they only played because I lacked the good sense to concede.
How many cards in sequence SHOULD be a game ending play? 5? 6? 27?
Orb has enough Strength and Impact to be a game ender. And I’d wager it typically is - I haven’t looked it up on HSreplay yet but I’d bet I’m right that it ends games on the turn it’s played, or within 1 turn thereafter.
If you’re in a scenario where you have multiple nukes flying every turn, and the game STILL goes on? Something’s stupidly wrong and it’s not orb.
It should be more than 2 cards.
Can you give me a defined number? And I’m more interested in the reasoning behind it than anything else.