Hearthstone Fireside stream: Warlock (finished)

[xskarma]

Allright, another stream tonight with some cool Hearthstone action, starting in a few minutes, use this thread to chat and discuss what's going on with it.

Stream can be followed here on the official Twitch channel: http://www.twitch.tv/playhearthstone

Or on the HearthPwn frontpage: http://www.hearthpwn.com/


Since we don't know which deck/Hero got chosen an early question for you, who do you think it will be?

---------- Post added 2013-06-27 at 07:06 PM ----------

Well the Hero question is answered, it was the Warlock that won the voting.

Awesome!

---------- Post added 2013-06-27 at 08:46 PM ----------

Videos of the action can be found on HearthPwn for those that missed it: http://www.hearthpwn.com/news/45-hearthstone-livestream

Pretty cool stuff, among them some sneak peaks at some of the UI elements for your chat interaction with friends, and of course matches between Warlock and Rogue, Priest, and Hunter (in that order).

[Skayth]

All and all, i liked the matches, even though I questioned some of her moves and unmoves that later bit her. But overall, I think I found my main deck *nods*

[eillas]

I love how the warlock deck is really just gambling and taking risks.

[xskarma]

I love how the warlock deck is really just gambling and taking risks.

It's what I hate about it. I *want* to be a warlock in HS, but I hatehatehatehatehate gambling and RNG fucking me over. I'm afraid I'll have to take a long hard look at the game during beta and decide what deck fits my playstyle, and not be focused so much on staying true to my flavour favourite.

Although, Jaraxxus. >.<

That 1 card might be enough to keep me a warlock, despite everything else.

[Sylf]

Is the stream up on twitch/youtube now? I could not watch it live since I had to raid.

[checking facts]

It's what I hate about it. I *want* to be a warlock in HS, but I hatehatehatehatehate gambling and RNG fucking me over. I'm afraid I'll have to take a long hard look at the game during beta and decide what deck fits my playstyle, and not be focused so much on staying true to my flavour favourite.

Although, Jaraxxus. >.<

That 1 card might be enough to keep me a warlock, despite everything else.

working as intended. each class must feel like you belong to that class. warlocking is a big gamble. as the goblin lock trainers said, you risk your immortal soul for power. that may give you profit, or it may end up badly.

[Skayth]

It's what I hate about it. I *want* to be a warlock in HS, but I hatehatehatehatehate gambling and RNG fucking me over. I'm afraid I'll have to take a long hard look at the game during beta and decide what deck fits my playstyle, and not be focused so much on staying true to my flavour favourite.

Although, Jaraxxus. >.<

That 1 card might be enough to keep me a warlock, despite everything else.

What I liked about it was all the drain lifes and mortal coils and soul siphon. Im all for healing spells, but healing spells that also kill? Win.=D

Sure, I do think some of the demons... come outs... needs to be nerfed... like the imp, I think needs to be 1 dmg rather than 2. I like demon sense... my deck will have max.

Now, from what I understood from the video, she said, once u burn a mana crystal (felguard summon) you never gain it back ur at 9 for the rest of the game (total). But, i saw her gain hers back. Did i miss something? Cause I know she summoned it with an coin toss (really had 2, but an extra) and the one disappeared at the end of the turn, and so the the one for the summon. I think im missing something.

[xskarma]

Now, from what I understood from the video, she said, once u burn a mana crystal (felguard summon) you never gain it back ur at 9 for the rest of the game (total). But, i saw her gain hers back. Did i miss something? Cause I know she summoned it with an coin toss (really had 2, but an extra) and the one disappeared at the end of the turn, and so the the one for the summon. I think im missing something.

I'm not certain you lose the manacrystal forever, but you lose it at that moment and wil at the very least need to get it back. It's a heavy toll, since it puts you behind for the turns after it as well, giving your opponent the chance to use his mana advantage to get better cards out to stop you. If you compare the Felguard to cards with a similar 3 mana cost http://www.hearthpwn.com/cards?filte...&filter-type=4 you'll see it's a better then the usual card.

I personally don't like the card. I don't think losing a manacrystal is worth the the minor 2 health + taunt advantage the card gives you compared to the norm, even with the thought that you can win the mana crystal back and still get to 10 mana at some point. If it turns out that you lose the mana crystal outright, and can't get it back? well then screw this card, definitely not worth it then. 2 health + taunt for screwing your mana for the rest of game? not worth it.

[Nerraw]

The offensive Lightwell amused me.

[xskarma]

The offensive Lightwell amused me.

It was pretty damn scary is what it was. I have found new respect for the Priest deck. I figured it was a pretty boring playstyle, but seeing it in action it actually looks pretty fun. With the whole Shadow/Light thing they've got they might be an interesting class to me afterall.

[Lynneiah]

Now, from what I understood from the video, she said, once u burn a mana crystal (felguard summon) you never gain it back ur at 9 for the rest of the game (total). But, i saw her gain hers back. Did i miss something? Cause I know she summoned it with an coin toss (really had 2, but an extra) and the one disappeared at the end of the turn, and so the the one for the summon. I think im missing something.

It destroys a mana crystal, but it doesn't alter the 'gain a mana crystal every turn until you have 10' rule. What it basically does is set you one mana crystal behind your opponent until you reach ten.

[Thorim]

Enjoyed the stream, the more duels they show the more they can abate people crying "OP!!!" I think as well which helps, if you see a class destroy someone in one duel people think it's overpowered, like people thought jarax may be slightly too powerful, but when you see it in regular action you notice that there are counters.

The one thing that annoyed me was in the first duel when she could've Soul Fire'd the Questing adventurer, then mortal coiled it to draw a card, getting rid of a 5/5, instead she killed off a 2/1, then again watching it on a stream is probably a lot easier to see plays than actually doing it live, though i did think this whilst watching it when it was going out live...wondered why she didn't take the opportunity to get rid of the 5/5 as the game seemed to flip from that point onward leaving him alive.

Actually interested in playing a Priest though in HS now thanks to this duel! before it seemed kind of boring, not my thing and Druid was going to be my only played deck, but now I will definitely be making a Priest deck.

[Deleted]

The one thing that annoyed me was in the first duel when she could've Soul Fire'd the Questing adventurer, then mortal coiled it to draw a card, getting rid of a 5/5, instead she killed off a 2/1, then again watching it on a stream is probably a lot easier to see plays than actually doing it live, though i did think this whilst watching it when it was going out live...wondered why she didn't take the opportunity to get rid of the 5/5 as the game seemed to flip from that point onward leaving him alive.

I was more annoyed by the "+4/4, but creature dies at the end of the turn" card being used on decent cards (I think it was a succubus?) when there were weaker alternatives that it could have been used on, still had the same net damage gain, but not lost a good creature in the process, that and her insistence on using it to kill her creatures off when the opponents board was empty, instead of using that minion until you were in kill range, THEN suiciding it for extra damage - as is, it was +4 damage this turn, but your minion is dead, ergo unable to attack next turn or the turn after, making it a net loss.

Not the most high end play, but hey - it demonstrated how the warlock deck plays, which was interesting enough. Quite different from the MTG black decks I generally like - makes me wonder if we'll see a DK / necromancer deck to fill that niche.

[MikeyC69]

Maybe they will eventually have a stream where the person playing the game isn't terrible. She could have won all 3 matches, but lost due to poor choices.

[Nerraw]

The purpose of the streams isn't solely about winning, it's to show off the game as a whole. And that includes getting your ass handed to you from time to time.

[xskarma]

The purpose of the streams isn't solely about winning, it's to show off the game as a whole. And that includes getting your ass handed to you from time to time.

Might also be interesting to people to play along and know they would have done things differently, regardless of win or loss. Though I agree if they'd just shown people winning all the time it would have maybe sent a subconsciece message that the game is easy or that they are purposefully showing off overpowered decks.

[MikeyC69]

It has nothing to do with winning or losing. I couldn't care less about whether the streamer wins or loses so long as they played competently and made smart decisions. She did not, just like the last stream. In this stream, not knowing what was in her opponents hands obviously, she could have won all 3 games if not for poor decision making. "Hey I have 2 awesome power cards in my hand, lets play cards that make me randomly discard because that's smart". Nope.

[Pizza the Hutt]

It has nothing to do with winning or losing. I couldn't care less about whether the streamer wins or loses so long as they played competently and made smart decisions. She did not, just like the last stream. In this stream, not knowing what was in her opponents hands obviously, she could have won all 3 games if not for poor decision making. "Hey I have 2 awesome power cards in my hand, lets play cards that make me randomly discard because that's smart". Nope.

Who says the streamer has to be a super pro player?

[Deleted]

The purpose of the streams isn't solely about winning, it's to show off the game as a whole. And that includes getting your ass handed to you from time to time.

Playing poorly isn't the best way to demonstrate a deck though.

If someone was giving a demonstration of a WoW class and started doing the rotation wrong and using utility abilities and things poorly, would you think you were being given a good representation / demonstration of the class?

Might also be interesting to people to play along and know they would have done things differently, regardless of win or loss. Though I agree if they'd just shown people winning all the time it would have maybe sent a subconsciece message that the game is easy or that they are purposefully showing off overpowered decks.

I'd like to think there's a nice middleground where the player lost because the game was balanced, not because they played like a fool. Giving the impression that the people playtesting and developing the game don't know how it works isn't much of a better subconscious message to send, again - to use a WoW parallel, I'm sure people wouldn't be impressed if the devs were executing a suboptimal rotation and balancing around it etc.

Who says the streamer has to be a super pro player?

I'm sure none of us are super-pro players since we've not actually had our hands on the decks so far, there's a difference between "super pro" and "pants on head retarded choices".

Doesn't take a genius to see that "+4/4, but minion dies once the turn ends" is best used on weak minions, not on throwing your strong ones away for the same gain, using discard cards when you've got strong cards in your hand is a silly gamble etc

[MikeyC69]

Who says the streamer has to be a super pro player?

Did I say super pro player? No, I didn't. I said "played competently", if that means the same to you as "pro player" then I kind of feel sorry for you.