Bored Druid Thread: The Next GenerationFollow

Just to take this and run with it, this is the part I just don't get.

It's the thing that bothers me most when I watch something like Fox or whatnot. It's not the conservative mindset, it's the pervasive fear that seems to work it's way into every newscast. You think listening to some of these news anchors that the world was constantly on the verge of collapse, crime was threatening to spiral out of control, threats of every kind were around every corner, etc etc. It's to the point I just can't watch it regularly, it's exhausting just to listen to a half hour of it (heck the fear is bad enough when you read it online).

Maybe I'm just not wired right Spoiler or something, but that's something I just can't fathom. It's one thing to have a discussion about a conservative viewpoint. That's helpful, insightful, useful, and I may just come away buying the argument in the end. But when you add that fear to the equation, and it's just a frustrating gridlock. You can't have an intelligent conversation when the other person is deathly afraid of whatever.

Also, Alma is one of those people who have been told/told themselves endlessly how they're so smart and that's why people don't understand him and he refuses to believe it may be because his communication skills are **** poor. Gbaji, I think Gbaji decided what/who was right a few decades ago and never challenged that, he's not like Alma but he's definitely not very intelligent either.

Gbaji is at least doing you a favor by getting really frustrated with your posts.


Edit: and I tend to vote for one of the most left leaning parties in the Netherlands and we call our political right liberals.

Edited, Mar 27th 2014 9:16pm by Aethien

Well you've lived in the USA for all of your life, some of that FREEDOM! stuff is bound to get stuck on you.

Yeah, I usually vote for the Socialist Party. Partially because I know they won't win any elections but they tend to fight really hard for social security and keeping studying cheap for kids which I think is really important. Other than those issues I find them a little too far to the left and I think they wouldn't do a good job of leading the country but form the opposition they can fight tooth and nail for those issues I care about and make sure the governing parties don't forget about it for a second and that's just where I want to see them.

That said, if US politics are two parties standing at opposite ends of a football field and shouting at each other, Dutch politics are a group of people sitting at the same round table.

Edited, Mar 27th 2014 9:35pm by Aethien

I'm generally pretty damn far left, particularly by US standards. I can understand the appeal of some right positions, I just have an honest belief that they wouldn't bring about ends that I find even remotely attractive.

The bigger issue isn't so much that they disagree, it's that they make a point of not being on the same side on anything that won't lose them votes, because American politics is based around the other guy being wrong, not about who is right.

So I watched some hearthstone on twitch and it looks rather flawed to me. You're just twiddling your thumbs on your opponents turn which is rather boring since it also means nothing can stop you from whatever you're doing until the opponents turn and the attack system bothers me, the attacking party decides what the battlefield looks like and there's no risk in attacking which really promotes aggresssive play and limits creatures to pretty much just being creatures unless they're giant behemoths.

Of course you're twiddling your thumbs when it's the opponent's turn. That's what you do in turn-based games.

Not sure what you mean by there being no risks involved with attacking. Attacking what?

He wants less zerg rush, more "You've activated my trap card!"

It's not completely one-sided, it depends on what you're playing.

You can't actually TAKE action during an opponent's attack round, but you can proactively make them sorry they did. Mage decks, for instance, have a strong emphasis on secrets cards (Hunter and Paladin also have secrets). These are cards that you play facedown, and their effect is triggered once the opponent meets the conditions. Ice Barrier, for instance, gives +8 armor to the hero when they are attacked. Mirror Entity gives you an identical minion to whatever your opponent next plays (which could be awesome for you).

You definitely get more bang for your buck when you play monsters, but magic cards can really turn the tide of battle much easier than monsters can.

The real balance issue here ultimately comes from longevity. Minions have a much higher potential effect than magic cards. Magic cards, however, let you rearrange the battlefield in ways that minions can't.

I think we'll see zergs get nerfed, and have an expanded magic selection to create new synergies and such with magic cards (because I don't think you can realistically buff magic anymore).

Yugioh had Dark Magician Girl, your argument is invalid.

I'm not going to say that Hearthstone is as complex as MTG (and I don't think that, specifically, is a problem, though it could probably stand to grow more complex).

But I do think it's more complex than you're giving it credit for.

For instance, take the Murloc Tidecaller. When used properly, it's a great addition to a Murloc deck. But for it to actually be useful, you need to be able to play it and protect it long enough to summon additional murlocs to make it useful, because it gets +1/2 for each murloc summoned after you play it.

So there are really two ways to play it. You can toss it out and hope to have it up for many turns, and heavily summon other minions to buff it up. If you're up against an opponent who doesn't seem to have spells (or, say, has used 2 polys already), that might be a solid choice. Your smaller murlocs can be used primarily as buffing agents, and you can use them to whittle down defenses to protect your big boy. It's a magic-intensive strategy, though; you'll need spells to make it work.

Or you can bulk summon in one hand. It costs 1 mana, so if you're later in the game (which, granted, isn't when Murloc decks shine), you can toss it and a bunch of other murlocs in the same hand, super-powering it. That requires you to have been sitting on minion cards, though.

The ideal strat will be a combination of those two, of course. But

And then you have Old Murk-Eye, who functions VERY similararly to that rat card you linked. He gets +1/0 for each other murloc in play (and has a default 2/4). If you have 4 Murlocs on the field, that's a nice 6/4 right there, and he has charge, so he can attack right away.

And then Murloc Warleaders have an inverse effect, giving +2/1 to all other Murlocs.

It shouldn't be surprising that Murlocs are popular zerg decks.

I do tend to prefer turtling strategies, with big beasts that I intend to last for a long while and strong defenses. So I do see weaknesses in Hearthstone as it stands currently (Druid decks, which are built more towards turtling, are really not as powerful right now).

And then you can look at those two cards, and consider the Murloc Tidehunter, who summons an additional 1/1 Murloc Scout (so, with a Warleader, that's 3/2, and the scout gives Old Murk-Eye another +1/0).

Hearthstone can be very basic and it can be more complex. You're definitely juggling fewer strategies at any one time than in MtG, but you're definitely not just tossing out minions with the barest of thought.