Initial Thoughts?

[Deleted]

The only thing I'm worried... Oh man. I really fear that this becomes just another Mobile TCG. Mobage currently has quite a lot of card games google play store and while atleast some of them are quite nice, most of those games are basically pay to win. Sure you can have "special cards" from events but initially if you want to compete... Well you really have to pay some serious cash.
Meh, I guess all I hope that it won't be another pay to win card game. They say that rare cards can drop from some random stuff... But uh, well they also said that there is a chance of failbag containing goodies.. (My 56th bag gave me a potion of the mountains). I'm too afraid to even try :|

Well seeing as you can break down cards and "build" new cards in this game you are going to be able to get the cards you want eventually. Besides without the ability to trade cards with other players you won't actually see cards that cost "more" then others, this is where you get those ridicules prizes in other card games where it's P2W and you can't play competitive tournaments without buying those 10 rare cards that cost 25$ each, every time there is a new best deck of the week.

Don't forget when playing other people in this game you get paired against others with an equal amount of win/lose ratio to balance things out, if you don't have the cards to play at max potential because of lack of cards you still get paired against people you can beat, which totally eliminate the P2W aspect.

[Diabeetus]

My initial thought is that I'm very, very, very, very surprised that Blizzard is developing a free+non-pay-to-win game.

[PuppetShowJustice]

Having played it at PAX East; I think there's potential but it seems like it would be a difficult sort of game to make last for any substantial length. When I was about a decade younger I flew around playing in high end TCG tournaments for Magic and Pokemon. Those games get to be complex because they tend to last long enough for lots of cards to hit the table and interact with one another.

I don't get that vibe from Hearthstone. The game I played ended in 6 or 7 turns -- and one of them I wasted by casting Holy Smite on myself because I didn't yet understand how to properly play a card from the touch-pad to my enemy yet (I don't own an ipad and the game interface wasn't being super helpful on showing me how to use the card I had picked).

I sort of question the value or depth of a card game that ends so quickly. I'll reserve my final judgment until I get to play with a deck I've crafted myself against other people who know what they're doing. But I was told up front that this was meant to be an easily approachable / casual game. And my initial thoughts coming from a hardcore TCG background aren't very enthusiastic.

Edit: The biggest offender in my eyes was the complete lack of a resource system. I understand this makes the game easy to grasp but resource management adds a ton of depth to these sorts of games. Removing actual resource cards really rubs me the wrong way; as it's a pretty careful science in a number of my favorite card games figuring out precisely how many resource cards are needed for the deck to work optimally.

[Firebert]

Edit: The biggest offender in my eyes was the complete lack of a resource system. I understand this makes the game easy to grasp but resource management adds a ton of depth to these sorts of games.

Mana gems are your resource and they can be destroyed or created by some cards.

Sure, it's not as deep as Yu-gi-oh or Magic but it's still there.

[xskarma]

Mana gems are your resource and they can be destroyed or created by some cards.

Sure, it's not as deep as Yu-gi-oh or Magic but it's still there.

Personally I think the heroes/decks where you actually have this kind of interaction will probably be the more interesting ones in general. We've not seen enough cards yet, but any deck that just blindly follows a fixed mana curve and no further complicating factors in their deck are going to be boring to me. So far the Warlock and Druid deck have interactions or complications, and the Rogue deck has the combo thing going on that makes things interesting. I've not looked into the other decks too much to say I've seen anything else.

---------- Post added 2013-04-08 at 01:43 AM ----------

Looking at the cards available again: Shaman have the Overload mechanic that interacts with mana to keep things interesting, Warriors seem to be focused on a lot of minion altering abilities (sort of commander like) and Hunters seem to have this secret/trap thing going on that might make for more complicated play.

Mage, Priest, Paladin are largely undefined at the moment due to lack of cards. Not seen anything to indicate anything interesting though.

[Kanadei]

Mana gems are your resource and they can be destroyed or created by some cards.

Sure, it's not as deep as Yu-gi-oh or Magic but it's still there.

Yu-gi-ohs resource system is incredibly simple. You literally just use monster cards as resources - even mana gems is more complex than Yugiohs system.

In fact, it was because it was so simple that Yugioh was so successful alongside resource-based tcgs like magic.

Not saying that its a simple game, because it has become quite complex with all the different types of summons and the ambiguity of turn orders and card priority but yeah it definitely has a very simple resource system.

[moodawg]

I was surprised and I think it looks fun. I've only ever gotten caught up in one sort of game that's even remotely similar to this, which was Plants vs Zombies. The graphics look cute and from what we know so far it looks pretty fun.

[Deleted]

Not saying that its a simple game, because it has become quite complex with all the different types of summons and the ambiguity of turn orders and card priority but yeah it definitely has a very simple resource system.

Yeah, it really becomes complex when you're on the schoolyard battling with chums when suddenly you realise you're fighting a monster that's erasing the whole of time and space (except of course for Seto FREAKING Kaiba). Sorry, had to, the GF is trying to get me into the GX series.

Anyway, some parts of it surprised me (as a bad amateur Magic player and YGO player back-in-the-day). The automatic Managem creation per turn is interesting, was expecting they'd go for more of a Land style, but if Warlocks (and possibly others) get cards that destroy gems as their resource, then it sorta makes sense. Honestly, I don't think we know enough about the game to make any calls right now, but from what we saw weeks ago, it's quite interesting. Definitly gonna get the GF into it (and she isn't even into Warcraft) at least. I'm interested to see how they'll work Paladins in, obviously Paladins are going to have some sort of shielding ability, but could that possibly be given to the Priest too (or instead?). So many questions. And if they add DKs and Monks a while down the line, all the better (because I honestly think that DKs have some of the best visuals and would be awesome for a game like this.

[Pendulous]

The automatic Managem creation per turn is interesting, was expecting they'd go for more of a Land style, but if Warlocks (and possibly others) get cards that destroy gems as their resource, then it sorta makes sense.

If warlocks are destroying their own gems for spells, they better be pretty powerful spells for their cost.

[Deleted]

If warlocks are destroying their own gems for spells, they better be pretty powerful spells for their cost.

The only card I could find that currently has a crystal-destruction cost.

Felguard: 3 attack, 5 HP, cost 3 managem, battlecry (when summoned) destroy a mana crystal. Doesn't seem too bad. Remember, that you gain a crystal during your upkeep stage, up to a maximum of 10 at any one time, so at most you're just setting yourself back a turn in resource-amount. It's not as punishing as land-destruction in MtG (and even that wasn't all that punishing).

[Pendulous]

The only card I could find that currently has a crystal-destruction cost.

Felguard: 3 attack, 5 HP, cost 3 managem, battlecry (when summoned) destroy a mana crystal. Doesn't seem too bad. Remember, that you gain a crystal during your upkeep stage, up to a maximum of 10 at any one time, so at most you're just setting yourself back a turn in resource-amount. It's not as punishing as land-destruction in MtG (and even that wasn't all that punishing).

Oh wait, no, that Battlecry lets them destroy anyone's mana gem. Wow, that's terribly overpowered for its cost. I don't know how it's gonna be, but in MTG mana ramp was really important, and losing mana is about the worse thing that can happen.

[xskarma]

Oh wait, no, that Battlecry lets them destroy anyone's mana gem. Wow, that's terribly overpowered for its cost. I don't know how it's gonna be, but in MTG mana ramp was really important, and losing mana is about the worse thing that can happen.

No, not anyone's, just your own. I seriously dislike cards like this, and it's the 1 reason I'm apprehensive about the Warlock deck. There's a tight line to walk between self sacraficial things to be overpowered and underpowered and I'm not sure the warlock deck will balanced from the get-go. Seems to me a lot of these cards will be traps for unwary players where the cost is way too much for the power you get.

[Endus]

No, not anyone's, just your own. I seriously dislike cards like this, and it's the 1 reason I'm apprehensive about the Warlock deck. There's a tight line to walk between self sacraficial things to be overpowered and underpowered and I'm not sure the warlock deck will balanced from the get-go. Seems to me a lot of these cards will be traps for unwary players where the cost is way too much for the power you get.

If it's anything like MTG in gameplay (and bear in mind; I quit MTG in like 1995, so don't bring up deck concepts that came later), it'll play out as a self-burn deck, where you're doing damage to yourself but, if you're doing it right, doing more damage to the opponent.

It's a concept that, if you screw up, will hose you, but it's powerful, if played well.

[Deleted]

If it's anything like MTG in gameplay (and bear in mind; I quit MTG in like 1995, so don't bring up deck concepts that came later), it'll play out as a self-burn deck, where you're doing damage to yourself but, if you're doing it right, doing more damage to the opponent.

It's a concept that, if you screw up, will hose you, but it's powerful, if played well.

Yeah cards like the Felguard that destroys your mana crystal or the 4 Mana Pit Lord 7/7 that deals 7 dmg to yourself are really powerful in the early stages in the game. Even tho you seem to pay a lot in forms of other currencies like health, the mana to power ratio is absurd in these cards and might enable you to dominate the playing field from the beginning of the game never letting your opponent get a standing chance, and what is 7 of your health worth if you will be able break your opponent from the start of the game. These cards lose their value the longer the game drags on tho, since at some point you might not be able to even afford to pay the 7 life anymore making it a worthless card to draw, and even if you could afford it, your opponent will have reached a point in the game where he can play equally powerful cards that just doesn't have the drawbacks.

[Deleted]

The Felguard may not say it but it means "destroy one of YOUR crystals". Thankfully the game's mechanics are automated so there'll be no asking of judges to come over and verify rules :P

And honestly, I see the Warlock deck working out very well. Mana crystal destruction isn't that big a deal in the wider game, as long as cards destroy 1-3 crystals (and quite possibly only a single crystal will be destroyed) the crystals can be regained easily. And on reaching 10 crystals, casting a Felguard for 3 cry destroy 1 will be the same as casting for 4 cry. Also, about health: Health is probably going to become another resource for Warlock decks to manage and cast from (just like Warlocks in WoW, Black in MtG, and the Egyptian Gods in YGO [insert Slifer the Executive Producer here]). Warlocks will have drain health as a deck card for 2 crystals (note I thought DL was their hero ability) and if they use up too much health and have prepared it, they can simply replace their hero entirely (or, functionally, restore health to Jarraxus' full, AND gaining a new hero power,).

[Pendulous]

No, not anyone's, just your own. I seriously dislike cards like this, and it's the 1 reason I'm apprehensive about the Warlock deck. There's a tight line to walk between self sacraficial things to be overpowered and underpowered and I'm not sure the warlock deck will balanced from the get-go. Seems to me a lot of these cards will be traps for unwary players where the cost is way too much for the power you get.

Then it's terribly underpowered. Killing your mana acceleration for a creature that size and cost is way not worth it.

Either I'm wrong, and this game will work out differently than my mind thinks, or Blizzard is going to have balance issues early on.

If it's anything like MTG in gameplay (and bear in mind; I quit MTG in like 1995, so don't bring up deck concepts that came later), it'll play out as a self-burn deck, where you're doing damage to yourself but, if you're doing it right, doing more damage to the opponent.

It's a concept that, if you screw up, will hose you, but it's powerful, if played well.

Well, black was about killing your life for extra gain (usually card draws like Dark Confidant and Yawgmoth's everything), not killing your mana. Land loss in MTG is devastating.

[Deleted]

Well, black was about killing your life for extra gain (usually card draws like Dark Confidant and Yawgmoth's everything), not killing your mana. Land loss in MTG is devastating.

To be fair, in MtG you weren't guranteed a land every turn. Not to mention that Endus wouldn't have been around for Ravnica. Plus, we're only talking about (so far seen) a single crystal destroyed per card with the cost (which, so far, is only known the be the Felguard, more will probably be added but until we know for certain). Comparing enemy Land Destruction to self Crystal sacrifice iseems a tad unfair. And so far we don't know if destroying opponant's crystals is even possible.

[Deleted]

Then it's terribly underpowered. Killing your mana acceleration for a creature that size and cost is way not worth it.

Either I'm wrong, and this game will work out differently than my mind thinks, or Blizzard is going to have balance issues early on.

A turn 2 Succubuus and a turn 3 Felguard could very well mean you win the game. The cards currently seem a little over-powered to be honest. The Felguard with it's 5 health is probably going to take about 3 cards (minions/spells) to take out alone. Losing 1 mana crystal but getting a 3 card advantage that early in the game is devastating. Also i find that being the person who gets to attack and decide what minions get to fight each other is huuuge and with beefy dudes on the field you are the aggressive player and can make all the favorable trades between minions.

[Endus]

To be fair, in MtG you weren't guranteed a land every turn. Not to mention that Endus wouldn't have been around for Ravnica.

Nope, I quit shortly after Ice Age launched.

Plus, we're only talking about (so far seen) a single crystal destroyed per card with the cost (which, so far, is only known the be the Felguard, more will probably be added but until we know for certain). Comparing enemy Land Destruction to self Crystal sacrifice iseems a tad unfair. And so far we don't know if destroying opponant's crystals is even possible.

The big difference is that you're guaranteed a crystal a turn, and you're capped at 10 crystals. MTG, even back as far as I was playing, was starting to push itself towards fast games; decks were being tuned to win in 4-5 turns. My Goblin deck once slapped a guy with about 300 damage on Turn 4 (which, if you don't play MTG, is about 15x as much as the other guy has, to begin with). That was admittedly with almost perfect draws, but still; quick and powerful decks are totally an option. If you can push things for an early win, you can secure victory before the opponent's strategy solidifies.

[Deleted]

Nope, I quit shortly after Ice Age launched.



The big difference is that you're guaranteed a crystal a turn, and you're capped at 10 crystals. MTG, even back as far as I was playing, was starting to push itself towards fast games; decks were being tuned to win in 4-5 turns. My Goblin deck once slapped a guy with about 300 damage on Turn 4 (which, if you don't play MTG, is about 15x as much as the other guy has, to begin with). That was admittedly with almost perfect draws, but still; quick and powerful decks are totally an option. If you can push things for an early win, you can secure victory before the opponent's strategy solidifies.

Wow... Cudos. Closest story I can come to that is that my GF had made a deck in Innistrad that resulted in her winning after drawing all her cards (in essence, a reverse situation of how Yugi won Slifer in the anime). Admittedly, I'm more casual in MtG (mostly the Innistrad block) but what I meant by saying that comparing land destruction to crystal destruction (my post was eaten up a few times, so I was tired and didn't explain) was exactly what you said, with crystals you're guranteed to make up your loss eventually. Shaman Overload seems a more interesting concept IMO, at least with what we've seen. I'm starting to wonder if they'll make a system of stealing crystals (seems like a Mage's territory to me) but I digress.