I passed 1600 a few days ago with an Accelerate Time build, but I didn't expect to pass 1700 for the first time with it. It's just a testament to how good the card really is, since I was hanging around the low 1500's before the expansion. In several cases, I found myself turning tides with it when I had it. Hopeless games suddenly become 6-0 wins. Edit: I'll add the summary when I have a load of free time.
Next time someone feels underwhelmed by something I put in the game, they should rest assured: they'll probably be 1700 soon
While I'm pretty much convinced AT can be extremely effective, I do wonder how much of that bump in ranking is b/c of AT, and how much is b/c of rank-inflation caused by the insane amount of fresh meat steam players
I'm not sure if I'm missing a joke (especially as you have misspelled spelled), or I'm just being pernickety, but steam is maets backwards.
After returning from a long hiatus I've finally found a build I like. I've been putting this card to great use in a wiz/wiz/priest team. Between Volcano/Accelerated Thought/Bless there is a lot of ways to gain advantage. I am almost happy to see Blind Rage on dwarf warriors now. You get to hit them for a bunch of damage and see all their attack cards. On more than one occasion I have hit my max draws, and as someone said upthread, it snowballs. I have never been a fan of burn as it is weak to armor and often pushed off my traits, but I don't like playing against it with my build.
Ahh, the good old days...playing against triple wizards involved some of the most strategic and intense gameplay. Bluffing, feinting, and deck knowledge required! RIP WoW.
Interesting! I can respect both sides of the argument, but I found playing against strong wizards often frustrating as well as strategic, because of the denial/counter -type plays, whereas high-level warrior play has always felt positionally strategic, without leaving a losing opponent feeling unable to do anything.
I would say the above explains it perfectly. When you reach the point of "I have nothing to do bit sit here while you draw spam (first iteration), firestorm (second iteration), all the control wizard cards (third iteration), accelerate time (current iteration)" then the fun starts to diminish from the game. I enjoy playing wizards, I played 2 of them (plus a warrior) for a long time when it was viable to do so, and while I can see the attraction on some level of the "lets sit in the far corner with a priest", I don't think it should be the meta pinnacle.
I understand that wizard play can be frustrating. That's because wizards have the potential to drop you without taking a single bit of damage, i.e. they can win on all fronts with good draw and play. Warriors, on the other hand, have to get down and dirty to win games and are more prone to taking damage. If you ever win 6-0 with warriors, it's unlikely that you'll have full health on all characters (unless, say, you run a heal bot). Wizards shouldn't be the pinnacle of the meta? I disagree. Wizard play is very complex, especially when you don't have combo draws. There is a multitude of tools at a warrior's disposal to simply reach you and gut you. Additionally, wizard play is far more varied against different opponents. Wizard versus wizard matches involve a ton of strategy if we're not talking about Burrft (but even Burrft requires good positioning and knowledge). Wizard versus warrior matches are a denial race: whoever's able to counter the other's action will succeed in gaining an advantage. Accelerate Time has a unique place in all of this. It's not one of those cards you spam, but one of those cards that you use to tip the scales. AT builds want to stack an advantage against you slowly (e.g. Accelblesscano wants more moves and cycled cards also known as stalling, Acceldraw wants a growing card advantage, etc.) and then cast AT to press for the advantage. AT by itself will yield nothing, and that means it involves a lot of risk for an emerald quality card. The impact of casting a single AT can often determine the outcome of a game. It doesn't have to trigger 4 burn cards, 5 terrain attachments, and 2 card draw attachments. It just has to give that extra "umph": make terrain do 6 damage to take out a vital opponent, make your most vital character draw a single extra card that will change the game, etc. The strength of the card lies in its versatility. There are many ways to get that extra "umph" with it... You just have to be careful about it.
I think there's a bit of truth on both sides. Also, I think a lot of the "playing vs wizards is boring/frustrating/annoying" is mainly because a whole lot of players favors auto-pilot builds, the kind you don't really think a whole lot about what your next move is gonna be. Ofc, that's simplifying things by a huge degree, a whole lot more should be said about the dynamics of vs. wizards games. But still, hopefully you do understand what I mean.
Yep. It's a "what type of game do we want to play" question. I prefer Card Hunter to CCGs because there's lots of positional play and combat every game. Wizards feel more like you're playing a CCG against a control deck than a tactical boardgame. It's up to the developers which type of game they want Card Hunter to become, and how they balance this. At the moment, I think the percentage of all-wizard/wizards + support priest builds is healthy, but not oppressive.
Ha, that's funny, because I feel the same way playing against warriors. I have to think and strategize much more when facing wizards than warriors. It's pretty straightforward as to what warriors are going to do, the problem is it is so hard stopping them. Warrior teams may get frustrated that they get TKed or WoWed (®lenbear) numerous times during a match, but what they don't realize if that all it usually takes is for that not to work once for them to swing the match heavily in their favor. Control spells are our attacks, because to have enough control to keep you away, we have to sacrifice so much in damage to be prepared for a warrior that may move 4, 5, 6 times in a round. Wizards are never going to have the same amount of damage as warriors, so it has to be mitigated by control. Any wizard that doesn't play control is likely a dead wizard, or a wizard along side warriors or priests. And the 'auto-pilot' builds are not just wizard exclusive; 90% of the time I see a warrior, I can predict a fair amount of attacks before they come. It's repetitive, boring, and frustrating, because many times as a wizard, you know what's coming (often in what order the attacks will be played), but you can't stop it. Or you can hold it off and hope something crazy happens. It's gotten to the point to where, if I don't get an amazing first draw against 3 warrior or 2 warrior/1 priest builds, I have to pick which one of my wizards will have to be sacrificed as 'bait', in hopes it allows me to eek out some points while the warriors are occupied. Not fun, but it is what it is right now. Anyway, this got way too long, and is waaaay off topic, but wanted to chime in while others were talking about this. Hope it makes sense.
I've never felt quite as helpless as when I played against @neoncat using this build. Assuming good draws, there's really nothing you can do against the Accelerate Time/Volcano combo without team moves. At best, you can prevent one of your characters from getting toasted before Accelerate Time gets played, and then that same character is vulnerable to the second Volcano they probably have stashed away. I'm not sure what could be done about it without making Accelerate Time useless, but the combo is pretty ridiculous at the moment and incredibly unfun to play against. At least it makes for a fast game?
I clarify I said sitting in the corner with a priest shouldn't be the pinnacle of meta. Not "all wizards". It's certainly more enjoyable to play vs 3 wizard decks than those, even if AT is overpowered either way.
