Hello, I ve really though about that The Coin might be the most game deciding and overpowered card in the history of the game. It increases hand size (previously Handlock benefited from that, now cyclone giant mage) and it enables combos for rogue. Not only that- the player going first starts w 3 cards and the one going second w 4(5) which could be good or bad depending on the marchup. I just feel like it should not be counted as a card. For instance in the CCG TES: Legends both players start w 3 cards and the one hoing second has a ring of power (uniteractable object on the board) which has 3 charges- each granting you a one turn mana boost. Compared to HS I feel like that is reaally good because you have 3 potential turn to gain back tempo from playing from behind but also it doesnt grant you an edge on some card interactions. I know those are two different games but I feel like The Coin shouldn t be a card and the whole start of the game mechanic should be slighly adjusted. Like in the Mage mirror the one w the coin has like what- an 70% win rate?
Do you feel the same? Do you think my thoughts are stupid/great? I would love to hear from you! Cheers
Well, you could've taken the time to google the coin statistics and would've found out that the starting player is in nearly all matchups in a small advantage. But yes, in some matchups it can give an advantage, but a 70% winrate is bs, sorry.
I would like to get rid of the coin too. The downside of the second player will be corrected by having 1 more card in the mulligan. They should just stick with that.
Do you feel the same? Do you think my thoughts are stupid/great? I would love to hear from you! Cheers
i think you sound like a new player who thinks he's come up with a revolutionary idea that hasn't been discussed a million times in the past five years.
Trust me, it has.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Why, you never expected justice from a company, did you? They have neither a soul to lose nor a body to kick." -- Lady Saba Holland
Besides Mage and Rogue, now quest Druid takes advantage of the coin as well, or quest Shaman vs slow deck to double Shudder, or Control Warrior in mirror match back then.
I play Rogue as main and it's ridiculous to see whoever has the coin wins in mirror match.
The should make the coin:
1. Not considered a spell.
2. Cannot active combo, give Rogue other tool (1 Mana minion, battecry gain 1 Mana for example)
3. Not a part of handsize
4. Disappear after few turns, so no Shaman cannot double Shudder with it. Someone just posted on Reddit how it took 7 minutes for his Shudder to cast 60 battlecry. Crazy.
I wish i could offer a better comment but I can't. I read this and chuckled. The coin that gets you one extra mana with an extra starting card vs someone who plays minions technically before you and can attack next turn while you play catch up. Seems fine to me. Coin works.
Besides Mage and Rogue, now quest Druid takes advantage of the coin as well, or quest Shaman vs slow deck to double Shudder, or Control Warrior in mirror match back then.
I play Rogue as main and it's ridiculous to see whoever has the coin wins in mirror match.
If your mirror matches are always decided by The Coin, the problem is not The Coin.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Why, you never expected justice from a company, did you? They have neither a soul to lose nor a body to kick." -- Lady Saba Holland
Sure, The Coin is probably the winning factor in your mirror matches. But that's a function of the deck itself, and not The Coin. Some decks and some classes, especially Rogue, love it. The majority still prefer to go first.
Or just make it not a spell, so that you can't get cyclone/auctioneer/lyra/counterspell trigger value out of it. I don't mind the combo and hand size ability because you need some sort of an edge going second, but the spell synergy always seemed asymmetrical in a bad way to me.
Isn't the average win rate 51%-49% as far as no coin vs coin?
Yes. But OP is under the mistaken assumption that no one should ever be able to exploit The Coin as a spell or a card played or part of your hand.
In reality, the design team is very much aware of all these things The Coin can do, and they take it into account when they design cards that might exploit it.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Why, you never expected justice from a company, did you? They have neither a soul to lose nor a body to kick." -- Lady Saba Holland
Isn't the average win rate 51%-49% as far as no coin vs coin?
Yes. But OP is under the mistaken assumption that no one should ever be able to exploit The Coin as a spell or a card played or part of your hand.
In reality, the design team is very much aware of all these things The Coin can do, and they take it into account when they design cards that might exploit it.
Odd assertion when you take into account the vast majority of decks gain no real advantage from having the coin. Right now you’re looking at cyclone mage, quest druid, and rogue players that like having the coin. That’s it. I don’t understand his argument
I would like to get rid of the coin too. The downside of the second player will be corrected by having 1 more card in the mulligan. They should just stick with that.
Not even close, you forgot unlike Magic the player don't attack the hero and the defending player choose if take the damage or block with your own creature what means the player with mana advantage choose the trades, Magic is the way you describe and even there everyone want to start the game with is an unfair advantage one card more in starting hand don't come close to compensate.
Put in perspective the coin and an extra card is not enough to balance the odds, except the second player is rogue, but is much better than Magic in this aspect.
Three words come to mind: JESUS FUCKING CHRIST! Nerf the coin!?!?!? What’s next? Boar is so OP please nerf to 4 mana?! Leeroy should be 10 mana and rush!?
Coin is cool and needed. This game ain’t planned out and designed well like MTG where going first isn’t as big a deal as it seems (or second if you are really trying to stretch that argument).
Hello, I ve really though about that The Coin might be the most game deciding and overpowered card in the history of the game. It increases hand size (previously Handlock benefited from that, now cyclone giant mage) and it enables combos for rogue. Not only that- the player going first starts w 3 cards and the one going second w 4(5) which could be good or bad depending on the marchup. I just feel like it should not be counted as a card. For instance in the CCG TES: Legends both players start w 3 cards and the one hoing second has a ring of power (uniteractable object on the board) which has 3 charges- each granting you a one turn mana boost. Compared to HS I feel like that is reaally good because you have 3 potential turn to gain back tempo from playing from behind but also it doesnt grant you an edge on some card interactions. I know those are two different games but I feel like The Coin shouldn t be a card and the whole start of the game mechanic should be slighly adjusted. Like in the Mage mirror the one w the coin has like what- an 70% win rate?
Do you feel the same? Do you think my thoughts are stupid/great? I would love to hear from you! Cheers
yes, a few decks benefit from going second with the coin, but the majority would rather go first and have the mana advantage up until t-10
Nerf the coin
Well, you could've taken the time to google the coin statistics and would've found out that the starting player is in nearly all matchups in a small advantage. But yes, in some matchups it can give an advantage, but a 70% winrate is bs, sorry.
An actual "nerf the coin" thread
absolutely, i would nerf Coin to 1 mana
Dranzerr#2178
I would like to get rid of the coin too.
The downside of the second player will be corrected by having 1 more card in the mulligan.
They should just stick with that.
i think you sound like a new player who thinks he's come up with a revolutionary idea that hasn't been discussed a million times in the past five years.
Trust me, it has.
"Why, you never expected justice from a company, did you? They have neither a soul to lose nor a body to kick." -- Lady Saba Holland
Besides Mage and Rogue, now quest Druid takes advantage of the coin as well, or quest Shaman vs slow deck to double Shudder, or Control Warrior in mirror match back then.
I play Rogue as main and it's ridiculous to see whoever has the coin wins in mirror match.
The should make the coin:
1. Not considered a spell.
2. Cannot active combo, give Rogue other tool (1 Mana minion, battecry gain 1 Mana for example)
3. Not a part of handsize
4. Disappear after few turns, so no Shaman cannot double Shudder with it. Someone just posted on Reddit how it took 7 minutes for his Shudder to cast 60 battlecry. Crazy.
Not this again.
I wish i could offer a better comment but I can't. I read this and chuckled. The coin that gets you one extra mana with an extra starting card vs someone who plays minions technically before you and can attack next turn while you play catch up. Seems fine to me. Coin works.
If your mirror matches are always decided by The Coin, the problem is not The Coin.
"Why, you never expected justice from a company, did you? They have neither a soul to lose nor a body to kick." -- Lady Saba Holland
Sure, The Coin is probably the winning factor in your mirror matches. But that's a function of the deck itself, and not The Coin. Some decks and some classes, especially Rogue, love it. The majority still prefer to go first.
Dependable loan sharks since 1960. We sink our teeth into every deal we make.
Or just make it not a spell, so that you can't get cyclone/auctioneer/lyra/counterspell trigger value out of it. I don't mind the combo and hand size ability because you need some sort of an edge going second, but the spell synergy always seemed asymmetrical in a bad way to me.
Isn't the average win rate 51%-49% as far as no coin vs coin?
Yes. But OP is under the mistaken assumption that no one should ever be able to exploit The Coin as a spell or a card played or part of your hand.
In reality, the design team is very much aware of all these things The Coin can do, and they take it into account when they design cards that might exploit it.
"Why, you never expected justice from a company, did you? They have neither a soul to lose nor a body to kick." -- Lady Saba Holland
Odd assertion when you take into account the vast majority of decks gain no real advantage from having the coin. Right now you’re looking at cyclone mage, quest druid, and rogue players that like having the coin. That’s it. I don’t understand his argument
Not even close, you forgot unlike Magic the player don't attack the hero and the defending player choose if take the damage or block with your own creature what means the player with mana advantage choose the trades, Magic is the way you describe and even there everyone want to start the game with is an unfair advantage one card more in starting hand don't come close to compensate.
Put in perspective the coin and an extra card is not enough to balance the odds, except the second player is rogue, but is much better than Magic in this aspect.
Three words come to mind: JESUS FUCKING CHRIST! Nerf the coin!?!?!? What’s next? Boar is so OP please nerf to 4 mana?! Leeroy should be 10 mana and rush!?
Coin is cool and needed. This game ain’t planned out and designed well like MTG where going first isn’t as big a deal as it seems (or second if you are really trying to stretch that argument).
Move on. Nothing to see here.
Maybe the Coin should just NOT PROC ABILITIES. There problem solved.