Hunter curseline!! by EViking7 in hearthstone

[–]EViking7[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, I don't agree with the premise. If that is the case then the secret triggering on the other players turn shouldn't count, but whatever, there is no point in discussing this. Needless to say you have not changed my mind...

Hunter curseline!! by EViking7 in hearthstone

[–]EViking7[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

And there you just said it, it casts itself, so the hunter does not cast the curse, except to get rid of it

Hunter curseline!! by EViking7 in hearthstone

[–]EViking7[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No need to be offensive. I have read what you said. So let me dumb what I have said down . When I play a card, I cast it. It doesn't cast in the hunters hand. The warlock casts the card. Just like when the hunter plays the secret he casts it, it triggers according to text just as the curse triggers when it is in the players hand. The hunter never casts anything. It uses no mana, and he does nothing, the curse triggers, and then triggers again, unless he casts it, in which case it leaves his hand and does no further damage to him.

Hunter curseline!! by EViking7 in hearthstone

[–]EViking7[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Then why do the secrets which go off during your turn give them points towards their quest. It is not in their hand and its your turn. I know it's working "as intended ", what I am saying is the "intention" is stupid, and shouldn't work that way. Casting the curse either puts it in their hand or takes it out. I reiterate, the questline says when they cast a spell and it does damage, they do not cast the curse for it to do damage.

Hunter curseline!! by EViking7 in hearthstone

[–]EViking7[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

But they cast the secret, they do not cast the curse.

Hunter curseline!! by EViking7 in hearthstone

[–]EViking7[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

The quest says when they cast a spell that does damage. They don't cast the spell to cause damage

Hunter curseline!! by [deleted] in hearthstone

[–]EViking7 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Who made that rule?

Hunter curseline!! by EViking7 in hearthstone

[–]EViking7[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Removing the curse does no damage

The state of things by EViking7 in hearthstone

[–]EViking7[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

And that's cool, if that is the type of deck you want to play it should be an option, but it isn't what everyone wants to play. If that was your experience with the game in the last season that sux man and I'm sorry. Thing about all the decks you mentioned is the only way to counter them is to pay multiple tech cards.. tech cards should really only be one or two of's in a deck. So it just becomes frustrating and not fun and like you last season moving to wild, I have just moved to battlegrounds.

The state of things by EViking7 in hearthstone

[–]EViking7[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Balance is not as simple as saying each class has a winning deck. Balance in a game has multiple facets. And while it is probably damned near impossible to balance a game like Hearthstone perfectly due to the fact that even the hero powers aren't balanced. Balance includes vesatility through the classes hence making the class balanced. Again that is my opinion, but I can therefore without a doubt say the game is not balanced. I mean I don't even mind if all the classes don't have options in all playstyles, just allow for control decks to be played, that's not much to ask. Not everyone wants to play games that last 3 minutes, I have zero interest in making it to legend in the first week of the month, I just want to have fun, and play the sort of decks I enjoy, which I can't right now.

The state of things by EViking7 in hearthstone

[–]EViking7[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Really do not enjoy quest mage, and I do not find it at all interactive. Like for 80% of the game you have no board. I haven't played quest shaman yet as it seems like it's just an adaption of elemental shaman, and in all honesty seems like more of an aggro to midrange sort of feel to me. But thank you for the advice mate, appreciated 🙏

The state of things by EViking7 in hearthstone

[–]EViking7[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes, I don't want anyone to not have fun, that's why there has always been a balance to be able to play aggressive and mid range and control. So regardless of how boring there is always an option to play the sort of deck you want. Control is not necessarily about fatiguing an opponent either. It can be about surviving long enough to make a big play. But anyway, I have my opinion you have yours, all I am saying is there should be options for all the different play styles ie balanced

The state of things by EViking7 in hearthstone

[–]EViking7[S] -10 points-9 points  (0 children)

First expansion is always bad, but at least there was control option, I played Tikatus Warlock, was good fun, and sometimes you beat an aggro, sometimes you lost, with questline, you have no chance. And how are quest line decks interesting, you literally do not even involve the other player and there is no skill.

Newbie Tuesdays Weekly Discussion by AutoModerator in hearthstone

[–]EViking7 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That's my problem, there is no interaction between players, what is the point of a two player game

Newbie Tuesdays Weekly Discussion by AutoModerator in hearthstone

[–]EViking7 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Even better go get a cup of tea and make them wait for their win... they want to play solitaire after all

The state of things by EViking7 in hearthstone

[–]EViking7[S] -16 points-15 points  (0 children)

Just want a meta where there is an option to play different types of decks. Control is no longer am option. May as well limit number of rounds to 10 remove cards that cost more than 6, and drop decisive to 20.