Another Mind Control QQ thread.

Posts: 5
Me: I'll use this Ironbark Protector that will let me get back into the game
Priest: *uses Mind Control*
Me: !@#$ this game *concedes*
Reply Quote
Posts: 18,723
Play a big card on turn 8 or later with no counter against a priest these things happen.
Reply Quote
Posts: 567
11/21/2013 02:57 PMPosted by Con
Play a big card on turn 8 or later with no counter against a priest these things happen.


So if you're not a mage you should just concede after turn 8 vs Priest. Good strategy.
Reply Quote
Posts: 3,126
It's getting nerfed so these threads can stop now.
(Yeah, like that's going to happen ever, haha)
Reply Quote
Posts: 247
It's why agressive decks are better in the current meta-game... If you keep board control early, priest will need ot waste MC on mid range minions,. Also, minions with 4 attack are VERY good vs priests,
Reply Quote
Posts: 1,463
honestly you probably lost anyways. If 8/8 taunt at turn 8 was "going to save you", then you didn't have board control. You have to adept and bait out MC. and always be able to do something when he does it.

Your options had you built your deck correctly
The Black Knight
Naturalize
Big Game Hunter

Having these in your hand would have been awesome before playing the 88
Reply Quote
Posts: 662
K, once again, Priests suck unless you are playing arena, and in arena their main problem is simply that their best cards are basic. In constructed they are one of the weakest classes in the game, if not THE weakest.

If the priest is not dead or close to dying by turn 8, and you don't have a control deck, it is 100% your fault and the priest out played/out built your deck, take the loss b/c you deserve it.
Reply Quote
Posts: 6,581
The most annoying thing about mind control is the 8 cost. The 8 cost allows you to use it and then something else (namely, healing the blasted thing they mind controlled.) What you have to do is play around it as much as possible. A lot of times you may not have the room to- and at that point, it's mostly playing Russian roulette.

Personally, I think mind control should be able to be silenced. And Sap and Dream should return mind controlled cards to your hand- not to your opponent's. You, even after the card is mind-controlled, OWN the card, even if you don't CONTROL it. If Sap and Dream are supposed to refer to the card's controller, then make it say controller.
Reply Quote
Posts: 112
Me: I'll use this Ironbark Protector that will let me get back into the game
Priest: *uses Mind Control*
Me: !@#$ this game *concedes*


Without getting into Mind Control as a whole, in this specific instance, where your Ironbark Protector was the only way for you to "get back into the game", then how is that any different to the same scenario against, for example, a mage, who then polymorphs it and continues on to win anyway?

Basically what I'm saying is: there are arguments you can make about Mind Control being an issue; this is not one of them.
Reply Quote
Posts: 795
K, once again, Priests suck unless you are playing arena, and in arena their main problem is simply that their best cards are basic. In constructed they are one of the weakest classes in the game, if not THE weakest.

If the priest is not dead or close to dying by turn 8, and you don't have a control deck, it is 100% your fault and the priest out played/out built your deck, take the loss b/c you deserve it.
Your post is full of crap. Priests can wreck your face before turn 8 even begins. Unless you are playing mage, it's a downhill defensive battle against priests. cards like divine spirit, power word shield, and inner fire can turn the weakest creatures into massive monsters. By the time turn 8 comes along, you have nothing left to counter mind control with.
Reply Quote
Posts: 1,463
The most annoying thing about mind control is the 8 cost. The 8 cost allows you to use it and then something else (namely, healing the blasted thing they mind controlled.) What you have to do is play around it as much as possible. A lot of times you may not have the room to- and at that point, it's mostly playing Russian roulette.

Personally, I think mind control should be able to be silenced. And Sap and Dream should return mind controlled cards to your hand- not to your opponent's. You, even after the card is mind-controlled, OWN the card, even if you don't CONTROL it. If Sap and Dream are supposed to refer to the card's controller, then make it say controller.


Sap only targets an enemy minion,but you want it to act like a friendly and return to your hand?

So should brewmaster also negate this Mind control. And then have you neutered an 8 mana cost.

MC is fine, play smarter. This coming from someone that runs a control deck that is not a priest or mage......
Reply Quote
Posts: 1,463
Me: I'll use this Ironbark Protector that will let me get back into the game
Priest: *uses Mind Control*
Me: !@#$ this game *concedes*


Without getting into Mind Control as a whole, in this specific instance, where your Ironbark Protector was the only way for you to "get back into the game", then how is that any different to the same scenario against, for example, a mage, who then polymorphs it and continues on to win anyway?

Basically what I'm saying is: there are arguments you can make about Mind Control being an issue; this is not one of them.


while I agree that he was probably toast anyways because he was relying on the ironbark to "get back into the game", Mind control is NO WHERE the same as polymorph. One kills your minion, the other FORCES you to kill it. effectivly, the priest is getting card control and board control.

It would be like if rogues assassinate, killed a creature, forced your opponent to discard a card, and the rogue can draw a card. It's that much of a swing.....
Reply Quote
Posts: 112
while I agree that he was probably toast anyways because he was relying on the ironbark to "get back into the game", Mind control is NO WHERE the same as polymorph. One kills your minion, the other FORCES you to kill it. effectivly, the priest is getting card control and board control.

It would be like if rogues assassinate, killed a creature, forced your opponent to discard a card, and the rogue can draw a card. It's that much of a swing.....


I specifically said "Without getting into Mind Control as a whole, in this specific instance...". In other words, I was not comparing Mind Control to Polymorph, I was saying that in this instance, ANY removal would have achieved the exact same outcome, and thus this cannot be used as a legitimate complaint against ONLY Mind Control.

Funnily enough, I know Mind Control is vastly different to Polymorph, mechanics wise :)
Reply Quote
Posts: 6,581
The most annoying thing about mind control is the 8 cost. The 8 cost allows you to use it and then something else (namely, healing the blasted thing they mind controlled.) What you have to do is play around it as much as possible. A lot of times you may not have the room to- and at that point, it's mostly playing Russian roulette.

Personally, I think mind control should be able to be silenced. And Sap and Dream should return mind controlled cards to your hand- not to your opponent's. You, even after the card is mind-controlled, OWN the card, even if you don't CONTROL it. If Sap and Dream are supposed to refer to the card's controller, then make it say controller.


Sap only targets an enemy minion,but you want it to act like a friendly and return to your hand?

So should brewmaster also negate this Mind control. And then have you neutered an 8 mana cost.

MC is fine, play smarter. This coming from someone that runs a control deck that is not a priest or mage......


I think you need to reread my post, perhaps. Not trying to insult you here but I think it might be a problem of translation, if English isn't your first language. I'm complaining about the use of the phrase "owner's hand" on Sap and Dream. It's the improper term and an improper use of terminology that requires us to figure out for ourselves what the true meaning is in terms of its gameplay function.

If I get the card out of the pack- craft it out of dust, and put it into the deck- I own it. The card is mine. If this was a physical card game, there'd be no issue- the card would return to my hand when sap was played, because I would own the physical card. In this case, I own the data that constitutes the card- it is my property that I have won at chance, or have crafted.

He is controlling it, temporarily for the purposes of gameplay- he controls it for at most the duration of the match, then loses it. When the match ends, if he mind controlled my Ysera, he does not gain a Ysera for his collection, and I do not lose a Ysera from my collection. He controls the card, but he does not own it. The ownership of the Ysera does not change. The control did.

Brewmasters don't mention the owners hand- it says "YOUR" hand- as in, the person playing the brewmaster. I'd be fine with Sap and Dream if they read "the controller's hand" or "your opponent's hand", in the case of Sap.

I have faith blizzard will make the appropriate balance decision. I have no issues trusting them on game design, with which they have massive amounts of experience.

I do not trust them to fix tooltip errors, because that can take them years. :)
Edited by Elendil on 11/21/2013 7:08 PM PST
Reply Quote
Posts: 2,823
Why are we posting new threads when Blizzard started an official thread on the issue?

We are beta testers. Please don't QQ like this is a live game, please?
Edited by Alanar on 11/21/2013 7:10 PM PST
Reply Quote

Please report any Code of Conduct violations, including:

Threats of violence. We take these seriously and will alert the proper authorities.

Posts containing personal information about other players. This includes physical addresses, e-mail addresses, phone numbers, and inappropriate photos and/or videos.

Harassing or discriminatory language. This will not be tolerated.

Forums Code of Conduct

Report Post # written by

Reason
Explain (256 characters max)

Reported!

[Close]