L0rinda

hearthstone Mean Streets of Gadgetzan: Preview of Revealed Jade Lotus Cards

6 posts in this topic

QKtjpVU.jpg

The next expansion, Mean Streets of Gadgetzan, has been announced, and many of the cards have been spoiled already. This preview discusses the announced cards from the Jade Lotus classes of Druid, Rogue, and Shaman. There are seven of these cards, bringing the total previewed so far to fifteen.

The Jade Lotus gang are one of the three factions in Mean Streets of Gadgetzan. Their relevance in-game is the use of tri-cast cards. Jade Lotus cards can be played by Druid, Rogue, and Shaman. Grimy Goons cards can be played by Warrior, Hunter, and Paladin. Kabal cards can be played by Mage, Priest, and Warlock.

Jade Lotus card:

Mz4oE2l.png

As mentioned previously, this card can be played by any of the Jade Lotus classes. Discover among three classes needs to be tested, but is probably still powerful, despite the wide range. Lotus Agents does not seem like a card that will see play. It compares unfavourably with the very fringe card Ethereal Conjurer, and although you should never swear by such comparisons, it does seem that the effect is unlikely to be powerful enough for a minion with such a low Health vs Mana cost.

Rogue cards:

vrGSdLR.png

Two Rogue cards were announced in the initial release. People have always regarded Rogue as a class that works better with The Coin, due to cards like Gadgetzan Auctioneer, as well as powerful Combo cards. Now you can choose to have two more coins in your deck in the guise of Counterfeit Coin. Of course, the downside of this is that there will be a lot less gas in your deck, and so such a deck would likely need to be fueled with card draw, such as current Druid decks, but it is a card that will definitely merit investigation.

I feel that Lotus Assassin is a really well designed card. The idea of him jumping out of the shadows, killing someone, and then hiding again is full of flavour. It also seems to be a card that could see play. Rogues are at their best when controlling the board, and Lotus Assassin should be good at killing two minions without reply. It will also function well in conjunction with cards like Cold Blood for lethal pushes. Finally, Rogue doesn't have great 5-drops at the moment and so there is definitely a position for a card like this.

Druid cards:

KMXKYuQ.png

Druid got more of the things it already does well. Getting more does not always mean getting better, and so these cards will all need to be tested against the cards they will replace. Mark of the Lotus will naturally be tried in an aggressive token build alongside Violet Teacher and Power of the Wild. There are definitely times that you feel you'd like a third Power of the Wild in token Druid, so there's a chance it will be played as at least a 1-of in those decks. When that happens, people usually find a way to insert a second copy, so there's a chance it will see play.

Pilfered Power looks to be a little too conditional. If you have a huge board already, then you probably don't have much use for the extra mana. If you don't have a board, then it will sit in your hand as a dead card. A potential use would be a combo deck involving Wisps of the Old Gods, but it feels like there are better things you could do with ten mana. 

Lunar Visions is hard to assess, but a deck in which it was played would need to be extremely minion heavy. If you do meet the conditions though, and get both minions reduced, the card becomes 1 mana, draw two cards. With that pricing, you can bet that people will be trying to make an aggressive deck with this card.

Kun the Forgotten King looks powerful. Arcane Giant is already strong in Druid and would probably be better if not for Kun's Armor ability. Naturally the focus is on the fact it's a 0 mana 7/7 if you reach turn ten, but I think that the Armor will actually be the reason that this becomes a commonly played card. Currently Druid can struggle to stabilise as it gets control around turn ten, but this would dominate the board while buying a turn after a turn nine clear. I feel that the Mana Crystal refresh is probably overrated by most people, but the Armor is underrated.

Shaman cards:

So far, no Shaman cards have been spoiled.

Other cards:

The preview for the Kabal classes can be found here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Turn 1 living roots

Turn 2 living roots or 2 drop or coin pilfered power for 2 crystals

Turn 3 pilfered power for 2-3 crystals

Also, the rare occasion you play Kun after Fandral to steal the late game

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll try to give my opinions on the spoiled cards and rate them, using this scale :

Spoiler

A : Obviously powerful, a multi-archetype staple, perhaps, a format-defining card.  (Tunnel Trogg, Fiery War Axe, Piloted Shredder);

B: A decent card, your typical "bread and butter"; archetype staple; reliable niche card (Blackwing Corruptor, Cult Sorcerer, Blood To Ichor, Acidic Swamp Ooze);

C: A mediocre or weak card that is a filler, outclassed by its peers or has a niche that's not reliable (Eater of Secrets; Stampeding Kodo;Stranglethorn Tiger; Infested Tauren);

D: It has seen play. Once. Something that's just really not great, but can occasionally make it in a meme deck, or via "get a random card" things. (Cone of Cold; Bloodsail Corsair; Starfall);

F: Striclty unplayable. It exists to brick your random effect cards. (Shatter; Wisp; Purify; Captain's Parrot).

 

Ratings are purely subjective, and, of course, opened up to debate. But I'll try to back them up with reasonable explainations.

One big thing to note is that I'll be giving two ratings - one for the current Standard, and one for going forward, in 2017-2018.

To kickstart things off - on all the triclass cards, or "Gang" cards:

Spoiler

The idea is definetly cool, but current iterations do not look great. It reminds me of multicolored cards in Magic: The Gathering, except for one huge thing. Being multicolored is a design thing that imposes strict disadvantage - a card is harder to cast because you need different types of mana. This drawback opens up space for card text to be good - and it will be balanced out in the end, because color screw is a very real thing. With those Gang cards coming in Hearthstone, design goes in a directly opposite way - being available to three classes is a strict advantage. You just can't make it good and don't stick an opportunity cost to make it fair. Also it would greatly reduce the diversity of the format. So it ends up undertuned, like it was with Inspire in TGT. 

Lotus Agents

Despite being the best of cycle, they are still pretty bad. Statline is just slightly beyond playable. Ethereal Conjurer is a card that comes to mind instantly, but that one is not played for the same reasons : Azure Drake just has better stats. Add the fact a Mage spell is in definetly better than a random class card from any 3 Lotus classes, and that those classes' archetypes are pretty tight on their gameplans, and you have a bad card. It's not bad enough to justify giving it D rating, because of what my D rating means, so it gets a C-.

Verdict : C- for now, C- in '17-'18.

Counterfeit Coin

That's a card I've wanted for Rogue since day 1. With what Miracle looks like right now, it will have a ton of potential. Going forward, though, it may fall behind if Rogue shifts from this playstile towards more fair strategies.

Verdict : B for now, B in '17-'18.

Lotus Assassin

I would agree this guy is a flavor win, but on the sole power level he does not make a deck. And the support for fair Rogue decks is not great now. Maybe things could change, but I don't have high hopes for this Ninja for now.

VerdictC for now, C in '17-'18

Mark of the Lotus

Much like the Coin card, having a Power of the Wild half is a cool but slightly lazy idea. It's much less flexible than a split card, though, and fits only dedicated strategies. Something non-token but proactive, like a Beast deck, wouldn't play the card just because spell count is already big there, and Power's flexibility is better. I'm giving it a C+ because I think it's way too niche. An efficient token generator like Living Roots is destined to rotate, as well.

Verdict : C+ now, C in '17-'18.

Pilfered Power 

I would agree with everything that @L0rinda says here. It can have a potential with a fast token generator like Living Roots though, but that rotates. Key thing to note here is that fast mana is very easy to break, and Pilfered Power is exactly that kind.

Verdict : C- now, D in '17-'18.

Lunar Visions

I'm not going to be a fan here and hold on these facts : a) Druid decks historically have had a lot of spells, regardless of how proactive they were, and b) It's still 5 mana, and even with a discount, even with a double discount, you're not going to play them instantly in the majority of cases. That's a ton of durdle for a hypothetical tempo deck, even though it's a better durdle than Nourish is. I cannot think of a Druid deck that couls utilize Lunar Visions before rotation, because Spell Druid decks are just so good right now.

Verdict : D right now, C in '17-'18.

Kun, The Forgotten King

First of all - what is this guy doing here??? Isn't he like, an ancient Mogu king out of somewhere in Pandaria? How did he end up in Gadgetzan? How is he a Druid dude? What is going on? Flavor Judge!!!

A lot of talk is about this card being good. I cannot agree, even though it's a 0 mana 7/7 meme.

It's a Ancient Shieldbearer/Arcane Giant split card, I get this. But it does not have any good qualities of these two cards! Either of these is good because they do not cost 10 mana. You can play them when they are needed. A 10-mana armor gain is a joke; against a dedicated damage deck, you should be dead for 3 turns by then. Against slower decks, this life would rarely matter, and for the matchups where you'd like to go above 30, there is Feral Rage which is pretty much the same armor gain, but it also can deal 4 damage which is huge. Same Cain be said about Feral Rage in stabilizing situations. 7/7 is a mediocre threat against Control, when you compare it to other options like Ragnaros the Firelord, for example.

Maybe it will be good after rotation, when the format slows down. But right now, Spell Druids are pretty tight on deck slots and have the bases that Kun should cover already covered, and with better options. I'm totally not hyped.

Verdict : C for now, C+ for '17-'18.

 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like thief rogue concept and was excited to get more ways to get your opponents class cards from the next expansion. But Lotus Agent is so disappointing.  Thief rogue wants to play his Ethereal Peddler on curve not  5\3.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Strongpoint said:

I like thief rogue concept and was excited to get more ways to get your opponents class cards from the next expansion. But Lotus Agent is so disappointing.  Thief rogue wants to play his Ethereal Peddler on curve not  5\3.

I agree this is a fairly interesting way to support Burgle Rogue, that's why they have changed the wording on Ethereal Peddler. Would Lotus Agents be a 4 mana 3/3, I could have seen them getting some screen time. But not in this condition, and not with Miracle being around and bei

I also think that Burgle was a failed concept since day 1. It has way too much random element to it, and does not add anything to Rogue design as class : you play some of your dudes to get their spells, so you essentially play with other class' cards, not your own, which creates a fairly empty identity if you focus too hard on it. Not having an incentive to support it leads to, well, lacking support, and so the whole archetype struggles.

OffTopic: 

Spoiler

 

I also get triggered really, really, really  hard when somebody says "Thief Rogue". No offense.

But, give me at least one reason why is this word is better than "Burgle".

Here is a list of why I think "Thief Rogue" is wrong at every level:

1)The original card is called Burgle. Not "Thief" or something. They are close synonyms, but not the the same interchangeable word. It features a specific mechanic, and it's only logical that this in-game action should have a name of the card it was "invented", or, at least, be related to it directly. Naming things is not about common sense.

2)Then we get to see a Swashburglar which features exactly the same mechanic three expansions later. Before that comes Undercity Huckster who has absolutely nothing to do with neither theft nor burgling, so we can dismiss him. I think Swashburglar showcases us the consistency in terms of how do Blizzard call their own mechanics. It also proves the logic I've outlined in point 1.

3)The biggest trigger for me is the fact we already have an in-game action that can be called "stealing", or "theft" in nouns, using the same pattern - featured on the Priest card Thoughtsteal. It has an actual "steal" in it - and nothing to do with Burgle, because unlike the Rogue mechanic, it bears at least some resemblance to an actual theft - you get cards that are in your opponent's possession - in their deck. "Burgling" gives you a class card copy that may be not in their pocket. Thoughtsteal is not unique because we also have Mind Vision and Shifting Shade. Granted, they have as little to do with stealing as Huckster, but here it is - a recurring in-game action. 

I won't hold on to the fact "thief" is harder to pronounce than "Burgle" if you are not a native speaker. But I only hit the sounds right 6 times out of 10.

This is a fairly marginal detail, but I just can't stand it when somebody on the Internets is wrong. I'm sorry if it looks absolutely irrelevant or stupid. For me it's not.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Paracel said:

But, give me at least one reason why is this word is better than "Burgle".

Decks are named generally after the things in the deck that are crucial to the deck. Burgle is not the sole focus of the deck. The idea of stealing cards from the other class is, with something else in addition, such as our site deck that uses Burgle, Swashburglar and Ethereal.

Thief is also a Rogue archetype from other games, so it makes sense to involve it, no?

Hence why decks are named Yogg-Thief, N'zoth-Thief etc.

If there was a deck that was the standard rogue list of 28 cards + Burgle, I'd call it Burgle Rogue, but that's not what the list is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Similar Content

    • By TheBeninator
      So the latest expansion, Mean Streets of Gadgetzan, has been out for more than a month now, and I was curious what everyone´s opinion on it was. Personally, I love the set. It adds more synergy with types of cards that weren´t as popular beforehand. For example, sets like secret mage, demon warlock, taunt warrior, and beast druid/hunter, have all gotten big buffs and can be viable in the meta. I got rank 13 with secret mage and taunt warrior alone, and hope to get to legend with them. What about you?
    • By Zadina
      The live Q&A with the two well-known Hearthstone devs took place yesterday and we've made a recap of the most interesting points.
      First of all, if you want to watch the whole thing, the VOD can be found here (it starts at 14:10). If you prefer a shorter version, Redditor EpicMelon has made a 10-min video of everything important said. Ultimately, if you don't feel like watching videos, we've made a summary of anything worth noting from yesterday's Q&A.
      Ben started talking about the new player experience, a topic he has discussed again this week. He repeated that most new players start off by playing versus A.I., some go to Casual and a minority goes to Ranked. The team has made it so that in Casual new players are exclusively matched against other new players and their MMR is kept to a 50% winrate.
      One of the currently most discussed hot topics in the Hearthstone community is the Ranked ladder. The team is satisfied with how clear the current system is in how it works. However, they do realise that its grindiness and the monthly reset can be a disadvantage and feel repetitive. To counter that, they are looking into short-term increasing the amount of bonus stars players can gain. This will hopefully increase the number of players in medium and higher ranks and move veterans away from Rank 20. However, they don't want everyone to be a Legend player either, since this would devalue the ranking. New breakpoints are also an idea the Hearthstone team is considering. As far as winstreaks stopping at Rank 5 are concerned, the idea behind this is that they wanted players to get to Legend "legit"; this could change as well, though.
      Moving to the topic of Arena, Dean announced that they are thinking of moving it to Standard format. Moreover, they want to try decreasing the amount of commons you get, as well as the amount of neutral Classic and Basic cards (especially minions). Some of these changes for Arena are already ready to be added to the game they are just waiting for the right time to patch them in. In early February, top 100 rankings for Arena will be published - just like the Ranked season ones. These rankings will be calculated based on highest average wins per run basis with a minimum requirement of 30 runs.
      The guys had a few things to say about the current meta, too. Pirate Warrior represented 30% of the meta game near the launch of Mean Streets of Gadgetzan, while there were also a lot of Pirate Shamans and Rogues. Thankfully, these numbers have dropped as other decks (like Jade Druid and Reno decks) started surfacing. Pirate decks are slightly more popular than Team 5 would like and decks with the pirate package feel same-y. If this persists, they might take a look at Pirates. Hunters and Paladins are having a hard time at the moment because they can't keep up with the aggro pirate decks. Overall, the internal meta report shows a stability in the meta: there is only a 3% difference between the winrates of the top deck and the 11th best deck.
      Lastly, there was mention of the Wild format. Ben admitted that they could do some things better for Wild. For example, it's possible that Blizzard will encourage more Wild tournaments in the future. The upcoming rotation will be interesting since Wild will have more card sets than Standard. Wild is far from dead: it's just half as popular as Standard, although Ben hasn't looked in the numbers recently. Earlier in the stream, Ben also said that the team is considering two options to keep Standard fresh: either nerfing cards or just move them to Wild.
      Lastly, Ben and Dean talked about various other small topics like the possibility of reprinting cards (no actual answer given), more Hunter and Paladin talk, wording inconsistencies and rewriting old cards, how a healthy meta is defined and Team 5 itself.
    • By Zadina
      Hearthstone Game Director Ben Brode and Game Designer Dean Ayala will answer all your questions on a live Q&A session on Twitch this Friday!
      The complaints about the lack of communication from the part of the Hearthstone team have been answered. This Friday the 13th (!) of January, Ben Brode and Dean Ayala will answer questions about some of the most heated topics that currently affect the playerbase. Ben has already made some posts about issues like the Classic card set and the possibility of some Classic cards rotating out of Standard.
      As always, we will try to have a recap of the Q&A as soon as it is finished.
      Blizzard Entertainment
      Pull up a chair by the hearth! Join Hearthstone Game Director Ben Brode and Game Designer Dean Ayala January 13 at 9:00am PST for a live Q&A session on Twitch. Our developers will be sharing some insight about the state of the game, the new player experience, the ranked play system, and answering your questions live.
       
      Have some questions for Ben and Dean? Here’s how you can be part of the conversation:
      - Tweet @PlayHearthstone with the hashtag #QA with your question
      - Post a question below in the blog comments
      - Join us live in Twitch chat and direct questions to us @PlayHearthstone
       
        Can’t make it? Don’t worry – we will be posting the full video on the PlayHearthstone YouTube after the Q&A has completed.
       
       
      Follow the official Hearthstone Twitch channel to be notified when the stream begins.
      We’ll see you there!
      (source)
    • By Zadina
      Ben Brode was active on the official forums and on social media these past few days and he had a lot of interesting things to say about various hot topics. Most notably, he noted that it's possible that additional Basic and Classic set cards may be nerfed or rotated out of Standard in the future.
      You probably remember that with the release of the Standard format, something less than a year ago, 12 Basic and Classic cards were nerfed. Now, Game Director Ben Brode revealed that more Basic & Classic card nerfs can happen or at least they may be rotated out of Standard. The reasoning behind this is that the team wants to keep a fresh feeling in Standard and they don't want to see the same core cards appear too frequently. That's why they are also not considering buffing underused vanilla cards, since Basic and Classic cards are already being used a lot and they want new sets to be more impactful.
      Ben Brode
      + Show- Hide The goal with Standard is to keep the meta fresh for each yearly rotation. There are some benefits to keeping Basic and Classic cards in Standard: Returning players have an entry-point to the new format, and new players experience classics like "Hogger" and "Arcane Missiles" that are iconic and great introductions to the game. People take breaks from Hearthstone, and being able to jump right back in with a few cards you already own and understand makes that experience a lot better. That upside has a real downside in working directly against the big goal for Standard. It needs to feel different each year, and if Basic and Classic cards are still appearing in large densities year after year, we will not be achieving our goals for Standard.
      We knew we weren't going to get there when the Year of the Kraken began, so we nerfed 12 basic/classic cards, to put more of the weight of the meta into the rotating sets. We always knew we'd have to watch the meta to see if any future changes would be needed when we got ready for the next year of Standard. If things are looking like they are going to be too same-y for that next year, we could see more nerfs, or we might rotate some additional classic cards to Wild, like we did with Old Murk Eye. No matter what, we're committed to making Standard fresh and exciting each new year. (source)
       
       
      Are you guys considering, besides nerfs, implementing buffs for underused vanilla cards?
      Given the goal of Standard is to keep the game fresh each year, it's important to keep a lot of the power of the cards in the expansions, and not in the basic and classic sets. It's not clear what that balance of power should look like (is it ~10 cards from the basic and classic sets on average?), but we're currently skewed so high towards basic and classic cards in decks, that we are at high risk for 'samey-ness' as the years change in Standard. Buffing Basic/Classic cards *increases* that risk. If the goal is to get more cool cards into the meta, just releasing awesome new cards in expansions should make an impact there, and still keep Standard fresh. (source)
      Obviously, this comment caused a lot of reactions and Ben took to Reddit (specifically this thread) and Twitter, where he answered various questions. A brief summary of his responses is that the Basic set is currently the most powerful in the game (source), while the team intends to keep the vanilla set unchanged (the term used was 'evergreen' - source). Ben repeated that the team's intention behind any future Basic and Classic card nerfs or changes is to keep Standard format fresh and "less same-y". A difficult question was posed to the community: would they prefer the affected vanilla cards to be nerfed, rotated out of Standard format or remain as they are, even if it results in a staler meta?
      On the same Reddit thread, Brode also talked about why the Charge nerf was necessary due to the Grimy Goons synergy and how new/F2P players are currently still able to reach Legend rank - something that he expects to keep happening in the future as well.
      Ben Brode
      + Show- Hide [...] We nerfed Charge (the spell) because we knew the upcoming Grimy Goons mechanic in combination with Enraged Worgen and Charge was not really fair or fun. There have always been F2P players at Legend, and there have continued to be since that change. (source) Ben Brode
      + Show- Hide We did this in 2016 when we nerfed 12 classic cards and it made a huge difference in how much the meta was able to change with the release of Old Gods (instead of just continuing to be Druid Combo). New players were able to reach legend without spending money after that change, and I expect that will be continue to be true if we change a few more cards in 2017. (source) On a somewhat relevant topic, with the end of the Year of the Kraken the end of Reno Jackson is also approaching. Ben excluded the possibility of this game-changing card making it into the Classic set - once again the reason being "keeping the meta fresh".
      Placeholder for tweet 817625802116214784 For consistency's sake, I've also included two Brode blue posts from last week. In the first one, he talks about the new player experience and how it still needs more work. For example. the climb from the introductory quests to actually playing the game feels steep, while getting into Ranked is also difficult. However, for their first games new players actually play in a seperate matchmaking pool designed to match new players with each other. There has also been a 15% increase in new player winrates on Casual.
      Ben Brode
      + Show- Hide Hey there! We agree that the new player experience needs more work. We've been tweaking it for years and have seen significant increases in retention among new players since launch. Most new players start playing against the AI and then take on other players in Casual. The Casual matchmaker has gone through a lot of iteration and new player winrates have increased by ~15%.
      Ranked is a different story. Ranked is becoming more difficult for new players over time. I spoke about some of the challenges we are currently facing with our ladder system before I left for paternity leave here: https://www.reddit.com/r/hearthstone/comments/58pxgt/ben_brode_confirms_the_2_game_win_streak_is_not/
      Something you may not realize is that new players actually play in a seperate matchmaking pool for their first several sessions. In Casual, we match them entirely against other brand new players with similarly-sized collections.
      That all said, we think the introductory missions up through Illidan feel pretty good, and after that it still feels like a bit of a cliff. It's definitely something we're aware of. Thanks for your feedback, and for the feedback of everyone else who's been chiming in on this over the last few months.
      (source) Lastly, Ben made an interesting post about another community hot topic: the ladder system.
      Ben Brode
      + Show- Hide [...] We have been discussing the ladder system a lot recently - we're not 100% happy with it.
      Here are some things we are currently discussing:
      Rank 18 players are higher ranked than 50% of HS players. That number doesn't make you feel like you are in the top 50%, and that's a missed opportunity. We try and counter this by telling you all over the place what the mapping is to the rest of the population, but it'd be better if expectations and reality matched here.
      We've received feedback that the last-minute jostling for high Legend ranks at the end of a season doesn't feel all that great.
      We've received feedback that the ladder can feel like a grind.
      We are reanalyzing the number of ranks, the number of stars per rank, the number of bonus stars given out at the start of the season, and other parts of the system.
      We are developing simulation systems that let us predict what changes to the ladder would do to the population curve. If we inflate too many stars, the whole population ends up in the Legend bucket and while that might feel great for a single month, the entire system falls apart eventually. People who played waaaay back may remember when "3-star master" was the pinnacle of achievement, and it meant nothing because so many people ended up in that bucket. With better simulation tools, we are planning on trying a lot of crazy things. Iteration is important in design, and getting the tools to iterate quickly is very important.
      Something I want to emphasize is that while I think we can improve the ladder, the metric for that improvement isn't necessarily any one player's individual rank increasing. Players want the better rewards (and prestige) associated with high ranks, or the Legend card back, so any change we make that increases the chances of those are likely to be perceived as "good", at least for the short term. But part of what makes the ranked ladder compelling is that exists to rank players. If you want to see how you stack up, ranked is the place to do it. So while some inflation might improve the experience, we need to be careful and make sure we end up with a system that makes people feel rewarded for increases in personal skill or for finding a new deck that breaks the meta.
      (source)
    • By Pogsz
      Since I talk like an ogre I can as well practice my 3D skills and play around with the hearthstone logo.  Here is a quick render I made this morning.  Maybe I will do some more, wallpaper, t-shirt print or other stuff... I don't know

      I will probably also just play some Hearthstone for myself.  If I am better I will maybe do a "silent" stream tonight! :-D Or at least keep the conversation to a minimum.

      See you around guys and have a good day!