Now we need the inverse card
3 mana
4/3
Start of game : Your deck can have only 25 cards. Your hero takes 10 damage.
1 Like
Renethal allowed them to correct for an issue that has grown steadily over the years: burst damage and aggression keep getting stronger, but starting health is the same. It used to be that at 15 health you were in danger, and then 20, and now these days 30 isnât safe at all. They fixed the issue, players complained, and blizzard (stupidly) listened to those complaints.
1 Like
Renathal did not help with this though, as you are literally adding 10 more cards in your deck. So you only need to stall to draw a key card BECAUSE you are playing Renathal. If you are using Renathal this way, you are shooting yourself in the foot.
Good point. Scratch that. The latter point remains.
You live in a scary reality, my friend. You have my well wishes.
Youâre mistaken if you believe that would solve the problem you describe.
My twisted sense of humor is like âyeah, the burning half of it is the bad part. not the killing people part. Heck, we can make some kind of Hunger Games spectacle out of it!â
1 Like
The more you learn about how legislatures actually function, the more youâll realize itâs your reality, too.
If anything, itâs worse than I described. The typical law could best be described as taking $10 from everyone, burning $5 of it, and giving the rest to a tiny minority like, I donât know, broccoli farmers. And these pretty much always pass, because the amount of time the typical person would need to spend to fight against this would be valued at about $20, which means it costs them more to fight it. Of course, the special interest is getting thousands per person if it passes, so theyâre very much present, with hired lobbyists etc. And even from the elected representatives perspective, you can barely fault them â theyâre hearing all kinds of support from their constituency for said law, and very little opposition.
I donât get why democracy and capitalism get such a differences in reputation in the popular consciousness. I mean, Iâm not antidemocracy, I think itâs one of the better systems we have. But like capitalism it is also full of flaws and weaknesses. Theyâre both just manmade systems, and like everything manmade they have room for improvement, which is something that most people correctly believe about capitalism. But for some reason with democracy they get all secular-religious about it, like itâs a sacred pseudodeity beyond reproach. Ridiculous.
Itâs also kinda hilarious that when you take things by a pure rational view we also not end with stuff like this.
We not even need ethics to stop us from destroy things.
LikeâŚ
At long run any city produces riches so we all win by just letting they alone.
Even if no one likes it.
In other words. People arenât acting only imorally. Theyâre also dumb.
This applies hearthstone game balancing too.
One is more stupid than it is bad. The other is more bad than it is stupid.
But yeah, ultimately evil is bad because it doesnât work, that is, itâs stupid.
I donât know why youâre turning to law and politics when that is not what you said, at all, in your comment previously. Your point was that, if given the magical option as described previously, that the majority of the US would vote sociopathically.
May as well just quote it.
Instead of stalling you could do something much more productive like card cycling to find that key card sooner or doing any kind of tempo play to be in a better position when you get that 1 mana. Stalling to stall is garbage noob play. Thatâs not to say that healing/armor is not without value. Against agressive burn style decks with limited damage surviving has its value but against repeatable minion damage healing is an extremely low value play. Thatâs why combo decks do well they donât stall they accelerate into the combos.
Probably because of the analogy but we should stop right here with it i guess.
But it really feels like blizzard nerf policy is 100% non regulated democracy.
Renathal ruined HS.
Was way more playable before.
2 Likes
I didnât say stalling for the sake of stalling is a good idea, so I am unsure why youâre strawmanning here. I admit stalling to find a key card equals bad (in regard to Renathal). Stalling to be able to make a play that changes the game, maybe not so bad.
Kills, this isnât just something Iâm posting for the first time here. Itâs a running theme, one Iâve been advocating for pretty much my entire posting history. How many times have I posted the âChoice, Happiness and Spaghetti Sauceâ TED Talk? Same core concepts here. If you want people to be happier, donât have the entire group vote on things. Instead break that group into smaller groups, and have the smaller groups vote for themselves. We KNOW that this increases overall satisfaction.
The limiting of what groups vote on, narrowing the scope, thatâs essentially the âconstitutionalityâ I was talking about. Maybe itâs not the best terminology; perhaps itâs not general enough. But the point is that democracy is better with limits, and turns to crap without them.
The Hearthstone player base will never, ever be happy with what theyâre playing against. Itâs an impossible goal, because every Hearthstone player is a voter in one big collective experience. Instead, try to give satisfaction to players through what they can play as. Thatâs something where you can customize the experience enough to the tastes of the smaller groups (plural) to actually give players moments of gaming happiness.
But first, the Hearthstone player base needs to stop looking for satisfaction in their opponentsâ deck choices. Any ideology that promises such an outcome is a false hope at best and an anti-fun cult at worst.
SincerelyâŚ
Renathal was overpowered in itâs original form.
Sometimes truth is simpler than people want to admit.
1 Like
I donât play enough to fully endorse this. But given that the card is apparently still seeing deck winrates over 50% in D5-1 (albeit not at top Legend, per the most recent VS report) even after nerf, this doesnât feel like a hot take to me.
How is T5 supposed to do that?
Let me give you context then.
Renathal was basically played in one dimensional decks that traded proper ant aggro defense for extra health.
So basically people did start to utterly ignore the early game.
It wasnât even playing bad curves. It was literally starting to play the game around turns 3 to 5.
what? Make archetypes satisfying to the people playing them?
Sorry I just want to make sure Iâm answering your intended question, but it strikes me as a little vague.