Unlabelled Hearthstone - LEAKED: New adventure for #Hearthstone will be «Lost Secrets of Un'Goro»?

2/07/2017 01:03:00 am
A+ A- Print Email

Hearthstone - LEAKED: New adventure for #Hearthstone will be «Lost Secrets of Un'Goro»?

LEAKED: New adventure for #Hearthstone will be «Lost Secrets of Un'Goro»?

Posted: 05 Feb 2017 11:28 PM PST

Beat the meta with "No Text Only" Deck

Posted: 06 Feb 2017 05:01 AM PST

After long hours of research and advanced simulation analysis I have come up with this deck that contains no cards with any text at all. The deck costs 640 dust to craft and contains no Rare, Epic or Legendary cards.

Decklist

First match: Jade Druid. Easy.

http://imgur.com/a/1vuRB

Deck Guide

This particular build utilizes infinite value cards such as "Murloc Tinyfin" to get on the board early. It is a "Patches" but better. Because we can put 2 of them in the deck (even 4. See "Alternatives, Wild format and Tips"). By not including meme cards such as "Magma Rager" and "Core Hound" the deck can establish early board presence and utilize this advantage to finish the game before late-game by aggressively statted mid-game minions such as "Worgen Greaser" and "Ice Rager" and minions with stat distributions parallel to of a "Chillwind Yeti" such as "Chillwind Yeti", "Boulderfist Ogre" and "Pit Fighter".

Match-ups and Mulligan

Mulligan anything that costs over 3 mana. Against Priest keep 4 attack minions.

Alternatives, Wild format and Tips

  • You can replace "Murloc Tinyfin" with "Wisp" (but don't that is rude)
  • Replacing "Faceless Behemoth"s with "Wisp"s can grant you a huge early boost if you prefer a more aggressive style.
  • In wild format consider replacing "Am'gam Rager" with "Spider Tank".
  • By changing your card back to the default one, you can create an illusion of a new player which might in turn make your opponent less careful with their plays thus granting you further advantage in the game. This effect won't last for more than 7-8 turns after your opponent realize how much behind they are.

Have fun

edit: f2p btw

edit 2: Forgot to state that my advanced analysis also shows that people most often auto-concede to Shaman, second often is Warrior. Since Shaman hero power produces minions with text on them the class of choice must be Warrior.

edit 3: My algorithm must have glossed over weapons. An error, to be sure.

submitted by /u/GameNationRDF
[link] [comments]

Mandatory Shaman shitpost

Posted: 06 Feb 2017 07:29 AM PST

Rant: The Importance of Kripp

Posted: 06 Feb 2017 04:20 AM PST

I think this is something people sometimes don't think about and I'll probably get downvoted because popular people always get a certain percentage of raw hatred, but here goes:

I'm not a Kripp fanboy by any means. But here's them facts: Blizzard will listen to Kripp, very very hard. And it makes sense too, from a business standpoint.

I don't think people understand just how important Kripparian has been to Hearthstone.

He is the 9th most viewed Twitch Streamer on Twitch. The people ahead of him are either gigantic companies (riotgames, esl_csgo, starladder1, beyondthesummit), or one of the big 4 League of Legends streamers. And even they don't have his super successful YouTube platform. His videos on youtube get consistent and enormous amounts of views. More than many celebrities and government websites.

Ben Brode released his video on Purify shortly after Kripp made his Purify video. Not a coincidence most likely.

I can absolutely guarantee with no doubt in my mind that Kripp has made Blizzard millions of dollars in business. You better fucking believe that they will listen to him and, to some extent and within reason, try to please him and his fanbase (arena changes come to mind). How do you not listen to the guy who has half a billion views on YouTube? Of course you do.

submitted by /u/OhLegit
[link] [comments]

Rank One: A Hearthstone Story - Coming to Cinemas hopefully never

Posted: 05 Feb 2017 10:24 PM PST

Just spent WAY too long making this tonight

http://i.imgur.com/EYD5JjO.png

turned out pretty cool :D

submitted by /u/jmxd
[link] [comments]

Meta has gone too far

Posted: 06 Feb 2017 04:29 AM PST

Was doing beast quest and faced this guy. That made me laugh http://imgur.com/a/yMFC0

submitted by /u/d1mis
[link] [comments]

Kripparrian: Why Ranked Play Is Horrible

Posted: 05 Feb 2017 12:09 PM PST

Hotform Shaman Rant

Posted: 05 Feb 2017 05:45 PM PST

Hearthstone isn't even fun to watch anymore

Posted: 05 Feb 2017 06:11 PM PST

As someone who enjoys watching streams even more than I do playing, I regularly have a stream playing on my phone while I play Hearthstone. Since the meta has become so stale I've been playing other games but I still watch streams from time to time.

Until today.

I was watching Toast's stream before shutting it off after he qued into Aggro Shaman for the 7th time in a row. Every game predictably ended with a turn 4-5 lethal, or a quick concede after Reno came down.

Blizzard keeps talking about how Aggro really isn't that overpowered and control decks counter it just fine. But they don't get that it's not about balance. It's about how pointless it is to play a card game that's decided on the flip of a coin in the first couple of turns. In it's current state, Hearthstone isn't fun OR interactive.

submitted by /u/knappster15
[link] [comments]

Fix "a Call in the Finishers"

Posted: 05 Feb 2017 09:17 PM PST

Clearly it calls in a squad of four teenage mutant murlocs so they should have names.

I propose Gillenardo, Finnatello, Rghaphael and Mrgalangelo

submitted by /u/TeTrodoToxin4
[link] [comments]

Magic rarely bans cards and Hearthstone follows this, here are wizards thoughts on the affinity bans 11 years ago.

Posted: 06 Feb 2017 12:06 AM PST

I know the hearthstone devs point to magic as a system they want to emulate, and I can get on board with that, Mark Rosewater and co are incredibly talented designers who learned their lessons the hard way over the last 20 years. I hope they haven't missed this one though, one of my favourite articles ever written, by Aaron Forsythe on the affinity bannings.

http://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/archive/eight-plus-one-2005-03-04

Affinity was one of the most hated decks ever, and yet wizards had the numbers to prove that it was far more balanced than previous oppressive decks they hadn't banned. Sound familiar?

 

And my favourite section from the article:

After all, banning cards is bad, and we only want to ban cards if a format was lopsided enough to warrant action, which Standard may not have been. The best deck only won X% of the time, was beaten by the second-best deck Y% of the time, and decks #3, 4, and 5 were all played in reasonable numbers. If we like the math, no problem. Just like last time.

But in the past three months R&D and the DCI have been reminded that Magic is not a series of balanced equations, spreadsheets of Top 8 results and data of card frequencies. Magic is a game played by human beings that want to have fun.

One of the most damning statements that can be made about a game is that it is not fun, and that's exactly what we've been hearing lately about Standard.

submitted by /u/TurquoiseLink
[link] [comments]

Hearthstone's current meta explained in a nutshell

Posted: 05 Feb 2017 09:49 PM PST

I decided to ask some friends what they thought about the current hearthstone meta, this is what I got:

https://i.imgur.com/k1w4Ino.png

submitted by /u/aussiequestions
[link] [comments]

For future cards / nerfs, please consider 'can't attack heroes'.

Posted: 06 Feb 2017 12:09 AM PST

With the recent uproar in this community about deck archetypes (pirates) and classes (shaman), I couldn't help but wonder why there aren't more cards that read 'can't attack heroes'.

I've seen many people wondering already why Jade Lightning can also target heroes. It's one of those cards that, upon first examination, doesn't look THAT strong, but in the right deck is jet another card that is too flexible.

The problem with the 'can only target minions' mechanic, is that we haven't really seen it used to it's potential yet. Several cards like Icehowl are just outclassed by other cards that do similar things, but can also hit face. Same goes for Flame Lance, which is just outclassed by Fireball in all ways. A successful and frequently card I can think of that can't damage heroes is Arcane Blast (and to some extent maybe forbidden flame), because it does things no other card does, and does it efficiently.

A card similar to arcane blast (at least to me) is Spirit Claws. If it wouldn't be able to attack heroes, it would still be a very strong early game removal card, it just wouldn't be able to do anywhere between 1-9 damage to the opponents face (FOR ONE FREAKING MANA).

The same goes for the almighty Fiery War Axe. This has been a card that has always been strong, an auto-include in any warrior list. Why should it also be able to do 6 damage (barring upgrades) to the opponents face? If it would only be able to target minions, it would still be a good early game card.

I know direct damage is needed to close out games, so I'm not advocating that all spells, weapons and charge cards should only be able to hit minions, I'm just saying that it's a great alternative that is already in the game, that works well and that stimulates playing for board advantage, rather than having the flexibility to have the advantage on the board and in your face.

submitted by /u/tehbolle
[link] [comments]

Development Cycle, Seasons, and the Ladder System

Posted: 06 Feb 2017 07:01 AM PST

Greetings everyone!

 

Last night I had a vision; a vision that kept me awake and that I had to turn into a concept for all of you to see. I'm strongly inspired by Ben Brode's comment in the meta balance Reddit thread, quoting:

Information flow is faster. It's a different world now and perhaps that means we need to rethink how we are doing things.

Finally, a bit of hope! The complains about Hearthstone and the digital format, balance, ladder grinds all got me thinking and I thought of a concept that involves the development timeline, seasons and a change of the ladder system. You might not like the complete idea, but please consider parts of it that you might like! Of course it isn't a complete idea about the future of Hearthstone and it doesn't solve all problems, but I just hope it gives the right people some new ideas on how to improve the game we all want to love!  

A short summary and all images used can be found here

 

-- Hearthstone Development Cycle --

 

The current Hearthstone development cycle starts with the rotation of older sets at the first expansion of the year, followed by an adventure mid-year and another expansion later that year, after which the first expansion of the next year brings the next rotation again. In other words, there is about a 4-month period between releases.

 

This can be easily shown by this image of the current Hearthstone cycle

 

Now, I don't want to change this particular cycle, because I do not know a lot about game development and I have no idea whether or not it's possible to increase the release of cards while maintaining the quality. Instead, I propose a second part of the cycle, which is particularly for balance. In between the set releases, so every two months, there will be a patch with balance changes. This is meant to shake up the meta and keep things fresh between content releases. If this happens on fixed moments during the year, it also means that the confusion will be kept to a minimum. Of course it doesn't have to be twenty cards every balance patch, the less the better, but it's time that problematic cards will no longer be ignored for half a year. Even two or three balance changes might be enough, it's just that they will happen on fixed moments during the content cycle. Each content patch might also include a few balance changes and tweaks, the developers should not be scared to change a card two times if it didn't work out during one particular balance patch!

 

Here is an image of the proposed Hearthstone cycle

 

-- Aligning the Seasons --

 

One of the most positive effects of the proposed cycle is that every two months, the meta will be different due to either new cards, balance changes, or both. One of the most heard critiques on the current season system is that many seasons feel the same, taking away from the 'seasonal' aspect. By aligning the seasons to the balance and content patches, Blizzard can ensure that every season feels fresh and most of all different than the one before. More often than not, the meta will be quite stable a month after new cards are released or balance changes are implemented, giving Blizzard a good indication of the most problematic cards left in the current playset. Blizzard then has another month, the second half of the season, to come up with possible balance tweaks, playtest them and then implement them at the proposed balance patches to start of the new season.

 

Here is an image of the new seasons of Hearthstone in relation to the proposed content and balance cycle

 

-- A change to the ladder system --

 

Now on to the second major part of my post, a change to the ladder system. Aligning the seasons to the development cycle means that seasons will be twice as long as before. With the current ladder ranking system this means that people will have double the time to climb the ladder. If there will be no changes to the ranks, this will probably lead to a lot more people at the higher ranks and especially at legend. To counter this, the ranking system will have to change as well.

 

An overview with text description of my complete ladder plan can be found here If you prefer to read it below, an overview of the new ladder system without the text description can be found here!

 

The new Hearthstone ladder will consist of three parts; A beginner, normal and veteran ladder, ending up at Legend rank. The ranks used are based on the very old alpha/beta ladder system and current Arena keys to keep consistency within Hearthstone!

 

-- A separate Beginner Ladder --

 

The first part will be specifically designed for new players. Instead of the current rank 25-20 with 10 total stars, it will now have three ranks, each with 10 stars, giving new players a longer time to get used to the game before meeting more experienced players. At bronze no stars can be lost (same amount of stars as current rank 25-20). The Beginner ladder will have bonus stars for win streaks to award new players that are either already more experienced or have a natural talent for the game.

 

-- No more win streaks, but your climb is secured! --

 

The second part of the ladder is the normal ladder, which you can reach by completing the Beginner ladder once. This ladder consists of four ranks; Bronze, Silver, Gold and Platinum. Each rank has 10 stars again. The major difference between the normal ladder and beginner ladder is that win streaks are removed, but 'Rank Securing' is introduced. Because seasons now last two months, people have more time to climb the ladder, which is the reason I have chosen for the removal of win streaks. This is replaced by rank securing, which means that if you made it past a rank once, you cannot fall back BELOW that rank anymore.

 

Example: If you made it to the Gold rank, Silver rank is secured because you completed it by reaching all stars. This means that once you go on a losing streak at Gold, you can fall back to Silver again, but not all the way back to Bronze! The removal of win streaks ensures that people can no longer climb with a sub-50% win rate, but Rank Securing makes sure that you plateau on the rank you 'belong' and are matched as equally as possible, even if you decide to queue up a meme deck halfway through the season!

 

The third part is the Veteran ladder, which is a continuation of the normal ladder, but is separated from it by the ladder reset. Once you made it to Master rank and beyond, you do not fall back below Diamond anymore at the end of the season. This means that you will always have some kind of equal matches, even at the start of seasons. However, if you made it to Diamond at the end of the season, you will fall back to Bronze, to prevent people from reaching Diamond at the last day of the season and staying there for the rest of the seasons.

 

There should be a complete ladder reset each calendar year, so that a Standard rotation also hard-resets the ladder (but never back to Beginner ladder!) This ensures that people that return after a long period of time who left at Master will have to do some climbing again. Once a year should be perfectly fine for the balance of the ladder system.

 

I didn't fully develop an idea for Legend rank yet, but it will continue to be based on ELO. I think points should not be awarded by your rank at the end of the season, but instead be based on the average of the complete season. I don't know how to achieve this at the moment to make it fair for everyone, but I think many people agree that a larger part of the season should matter for Legend players. You might be able to opt in and out of Legend rank, so that If you prefer to play a fun deck, you can opt out of Legend and play at Grandmaster rank and not lose your current position on the Legend ranking.

 

Main points of the ladder system:

  • Seasons will follow the Hearthstone development timeline and therefore be 2-months long

  • Seperate beginner ladder which keeps new players seperated from the rest of the playerbase for a longer period of time

  • No more winstreaks at the Normal and Veteran ladder due to longer seasons, instead Rank Securing to keep players at their supposed playing level.

  • Rank reset at the end of the season to the start of your current ladder (except for Diamond which goes back to Bronze)

  • Hard-reset of the Normal and Veteran ladder each Standard Rotation

  • Legend points no longer awarded by rank at the end of the season, the journey should matter

  • Fun fact: The complete new ladder will now have 100 stars compared to the 95 stars of the current ladder

 

Thank you for reading my post and hopefully it gives Blizzard some nice ideas about how content and balance patches could give structure to the game's seasons and how the ladder experience could change alongside it! Let your own ideas and opinions be heard, you do not have to agree with everything, I'm just joining the think-tank on how to work on a better Hearthstone!

 

TL;DR Blizzard should implement a new development cycle, which incorporates balance patches on top of the current content releases with new cards. The seasons could be aligned to the new cycle, ensuring that every season feels unique and problematic cards or decks won't affect multiple seasons in a row. A new ladder system could make the new player experience better and give players a more equal playing field after a season reset and during the season itself due to Rank Securing! Once again, all images used in this thread can be found here

submitted by /u/Hermke
[link] [comments]

This meta is killing Hearthstone's brand.

Posted: 06 Feb 2017 12:13 AM PST

I love watching Hearthstone streams. I watch them more than I play the game and I've always found them super entertaining. It's fun to watch and figure out what you would do as a player and see what they do as "pros", but it's gotten so bad that the streamers I love watching are so fed up with the meta that it's unentertaining. Kripp and Reynard are always salty but they're good players and they are fun to watch play, but the last few nights they've gotten so fed up that they start playing games I don't want to watch. Even sadder than that is they visibly have more fun playing those games. Even a guy like Savjz who is normally quite upbeat is visibly annoyed and frustrated. Day9 starting playing the Patches/Gang Up deck in Wild because he said it's the most fun he had in a while.

These are literally the ambassadors of this game and they are frustrated/bored with it. When they are getting fed up with grinding to legend or even playing arena, what does it say about the state of the game?

Blizzard can market this game with bad commericals all they want, but when new players are just getting stomped because their decks will never be competitive and established players are worn out from how bad it's become, I honestly can't see how they can justify not nerfing cards on the fly.

Frankly it's sad to watch, and it makes me want to play the game less than I already do. But, hey, they're making half a billion per year so why care? As long as people keep paying they're not going to give a shit and I guess that's on us.

Edit: I mean, fuck, even Toast is getting super salty and sarcastic on his streams and he's based his entire brand on being a guy that finds fun, cool interactions and decks to compete with.

submitted by /u/Impostor1089
[link] [comments]

I miss the days of Control Warrior keeping the meta in check.

Posted: 06 Feb 2017 05:18 AM PST

Disclaimer: Started playing on GVG launch and was mainly doing Control Warrior.

As much as a lot of people have complained about Control Warrior over the years, it has often throughout Hearthstone's history kept the strongest meta decks in check.

Back when GVG came out, if you didn't want to play Mech Mage like everyone else, Control Warrior is your greatest friend.

When BRM came out and everyone and their mother was playing Patron Warrior, Control Warrior was one of (if not your only) best bets to counter that deck.

The Grand Tournament came out and even with the rise of Face Hunter and Secret Pally, cards like Bash and Justicar Trueheart helped Warrior survive the onslaught of damage from aggressive decks.

Then Warsong Commander get's nerfed and everyone ( including Control Warriors ) get a sigh of relief about worrying about getting killed from had at even 60+ HP

The League of Explorers enters the Tavern and changes how you play the Control Mirrors play out with Elise. We start to see the rise of an Aggro Shaman, but Control Warrior is able to keep it from getting out of control.

Then standard comes and we get the rotation of Nax and GVG (which had a lot of anti-aggro cards ) the introduction to the Old Gods, and and the nerf to a large amount of basic cards. Everyone thought that warrior was going to struggle with the loss of Death's Bite (myself included ) but it was the opposite that actually happened. Warrior thrived in the new Rotation. You could build Warrior is multiple ways; even the Control variants has a large amount of variation depending on which Old God (or none) you wanted to use. Even with the rise of Aggro and Midrange Shaman, (and the later rise of Dragon Warrior) Control Warrior always had your back.

Then ONiK came out and Aggro and Midrange Shaman got a large power spike and basically made the decks top tier over almost everything else outside of Maybe Dragon Warrior. Control Warrior did struggle for a bit, but it was still a reasonable counter to the aggressive decks.

Then we had the nerfs to 7 cards that we're deemed too strong, and while these cards were well deserved, the nerfs actually caused the rise of Midrange Shaman to be the SINGLE best deck in the game. Even Control Warrior was having trouble dealing with it because the deck struggles with Midrange decks.

Then at Blizzcon, we get the announcements of MSoG, and then the drip feed of the rest of the set, and I was worried about the state of Control Warrior. Not because the archetype was not getting much support in the new set, but because there were other cards announced that really seem very powerful to use vs a deck like Control Warrior, like Kazakus and the Jade Golem mechanic. Now I'm not saying these cards are overpowered or anything, but based on those two ideas, it pushes Control Warrior out of what it was best at, getting good value with the cards that it has.

If I happened to miss something in this timeline, do let m know.

Now sure, even as Ben Brode mentioned in his recent blog post, you can still use Control Warrior to counter to counter the Aggressive decks, but you lose to nearly everything else because you cannot get enough value. I remember the days where cards like Sylvanas, Barron Gedon, (Who basically got power creeped by Abyssal Enforcer.) Ragnaros, and Ysera could be cards that can get two-for-one value when used right. Where's the value in buffing a random minion in your hand with +5+5 if it still dies to the same hard removal?

It also doesn't help that there is so much anti-weapon hate right now. You're never going to get value out of a weapon like Gorehowl once your opponent realizes you're not a pirate deck.

I miss that, and sure, there are other control decks in the meta, but they all have trouble dealing with the aggressive decks unless they draw really well, and of course if you are playing as a Control Warrior and they are a Kazakus or Jade deck, you just can't out value them if you play out the long game.

TL:DR Control Warrior could've kept the current aggressive meta in check, but that's not likely to happen since you are so unfavored vs the Reno and Jade decks out there.

submitted by /u/TheTfboy
[link] [comments]

Meta Decks after rotation (based on TempoStorm meta snapshot)

Posted: 06 Feb 2017 05:16 AM PST

Assuming the new expansion somehow adds no viable cards to constructed play this is my view on the viability of the top 3 tier's decks

TIER 1

Deck Num. of Cards Lost Viability Thoughts
Aggro Shaman 5 Maybe As 4 of the cards lost are some of it's most powerful minions and a STB nerf possible good early game minions would need to be found as replacements
Reno Mage 6 Probably Not Two of the biggest strengths of this list are rotating out, Reno and Thaurissan combo. As well as Kazakus will be severely weakened by the loss of Brann.
Jade-Midrange Shaman 0 Yes Perhaps just a more consistent version of aggro it can only become stronger with the new set
Pirate Warrior 1 Probably Based on my experience witht the ladder pirate warrior has been phasing out in favour(Canadian btw) of Shaman and with it's continued strength... Ehh?
Renolock 6 No Similarly to Reno Mage it strongest feature is gone along with it's support to the card that could keep it alive

TIER 2

Deck Num. of Cards Lost Viability Thoughts
Miracle Rogue 2 Yes When was the last time Miracle Rogue didn't exist? Oil Rogue?
Control Warrior 1 Probably Control Warrior has always been decent in some form. Although it's taking a decent hit with Justicar it'll probably stay
Dragon Priest 9 No One third of the deck gone. The strongest dragon synergies besides OP gone. Need i say more?

TIER 3(aka Time for the TLDR)

Deck Num. of Cards Lost Viability Thoughts
Control Shaman 2 Probably While losing a bit of healing, not much else is lost
Dragon Warrior 11 No Alexstasza's Champion, the reason for the deck existing, is gone
Jade Druid 3 Yes Will stop mill decks from even being theorycrafted for another year
Pirate Rogue 6 Maybe While the main "pirate package" is here to stay some of the more aggressive minions in this deck will be gone
Reno Priest 8 Maybe Some of it's stronger synergies and cards will be gone but raza may be strong enough for a "reno" deck on his own
Anyfin Paladin 4 NO The entire purpose of this deck will be rotating out
Tempo Mage 6 Probably While losing some of it's strongest assets Tempo mage has always had help from its classic set
Ramp Druid 5 Yes Probably not this specific kun-combo style but ramp druid was successful withh just its classic roots and some big minions
Freeze Mage 3 Probably Losing emperor is a big hit for sure but evolved kobold is here to stay so a nice little combo still exists there

So that sums up my analysis of the rotating meta and what we can probably expect to stay at least in some form or some tier of playability this coming year

submitted by /u/Derconug
[link] [comments]

Suggestion: Show a table of the most played classes in the last 24 hours and then give gold and dust reward multipliers to classes that are the least played for each ranked win

Posted: 06 Feb 2017 04:41 AM PST

This gives people a reason to play other classes.

It also rewards people for playing weaker classes. If we assume the strongest are the most played it stands to reason the weakest are the least played

This also helps to solve the grinding issue HS has and the slow accumulation of cards

Example could be that each win with classes as ranked. Capped at 30 wins

1st, 2nd and 3rd = No multiplier

4th + 2 gold

5th + 3 gold

6th + 4 gold

7th + 4 gold and 2 dust

8th + 4 gold and 3 dust

9th + 4 gold and 4 dust

My numbers may need refining they are simply to demonstrate

With my current figure it means you get a maximum total of 220 gold and 120 dust per day if playing with the class ranked 9th

submitted by /u/CheloniaMydas
[link] [comments]

This Reddit Thread on Undertaker before it's nerf 2 years ago is super relevant to the current meta.

Posted: 05 Feb 2017 02:18 PM PST

Why Ben Brode Is Wrong About Undertaker

The thread mentions a 5/6 Undertaker by turn 3.

The current meta feels a lot like the Undertaker meta did.

 

Warrior going second on turn one:

3/2 Minion

1/1 Minion

1/1 Minion with charge

1/3 Weapon

 

Edit: Adding Shaman as both decks have the same "Turn one" strategy.

Shaman going second on turn one:

3/2 Minion

1/1 Minion with charge

1/3 Weapon with the possibility of having 3 attack in future turns.

 

If they draw that starting hand, you get steamrolled.

If Hunter drew Undertaker + Haunted Creeper/Leper Gnome, you get steamrolled.

To exacerbate the problem, Patches doesn't need to be in your starting hand.

 

I feel like Team 5 hasn't learned from mistakes like this in the past.

I'm talking about attempting to let people figure it out, not necessarily that they shouldn't have printed Patches/Buccaneer.

After the Undertaker meta, they should have learned that oppressive 1 drops won't be "figured out" after a month or two.

Edit: Title says "it's" should be "its", was bugging me.

submitted by /u/StormyInferno
[link] [comments]

Kiblers Girlfriend Plays Badly, Gets Rewarded

Posted: 06 Feb 2017 08:11 AM PST

Draw your favorite card in Microsoft Paint, then other players will guess what card it is.

Posted: 05 Feb 2017 10:57 PM PST

[Reynad] The Snap Concede

Posted: 05 Feb 2017 11:14 AM PST

Is it me or the problem is that MSoG created an unfair meta for all classes?

Posted: 05 Feb 2017 08:53 PM PST

Yeah, I might not get legend with my N'zoth Reno Warrior but I could always play it. Now if you can't survive the first 4 turns of pirate warrior you're dead and if you can survive that... but can't survive an infinite Golem Parade or double Kazakus potion you're dead too... How is this fair? How is this favorable design space when all the cards in your deck are auto selected to fight the meta and you can't change a deck because it loses to aggro or Kazakus Reno?

submitted by /u/richie_ea
[link] [comments]

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)

Contact Form

Name

Email *

Message *

Games26 © 2015. All Rights Reserved.
Powered By Blogger
Powered by Blogger.