Hearthpwn

I think the major issue is what exactly guilds would bring to the table. A group chat is obviously a pretty large upside, but not really substantial enough of a reason by itself.

What I believe the game needs first is some form of tournament mode. Once that is out of the way it could be expanded upon by having guild vs guild tournaments with some kind of guild ranking. This along side rewards like guild rank cardbacks would actually give players an incentive to include the best players possible in their guild and gives a sense of purpose to being in one. 

This would probably also require some form of profile page to tie in with it. Something as basic as showing highest rank ever, highest current rank, and the ability to look at their collection seems pretty appropriate.

Quote from DiamondDM13 >>

Quote from Nickfuryusn >>

Bad matchups in this game are one thing, but unwinnable ones should almost not exist

 This is no such thing as an unwinnable matchup. By the large variance of variables with all the RNG aspects of Draw and Random Effects, to expertise in the matchup from the players, there is not a single unwinnable matchup. There are really hard matchup, as a Freeze Mage lover with a long history of very difficult Control Warrior wins, but unwinnable matchups don't exist.

For unwinnable matchups to exist, you need to have both players playing perfectly, and you need all luck aspects of the game to never favour the player with the disadvantaged strategy. You can control the first condition, but you cannot control the luck condition which by it's existence, guarantees the impossibility of unwinnable matchups.

 Yea dude sometimes you can eek out a win against Kingsbane as a control deck, but it's literally due to luck. Your argument is equivalent to saying, "Well your opponent could get hit by a car and get dc'd". Actually, there are probably matchups where it's more likely for your opponent to disconnect for some arbitrary reason than for you to win through actual ingame choices.

Quote from DMH_Meta >>

Sorry but no. Your issue is the same in standard for ppl playing control vs shudderwock, or any kind of combo deck to be honest.

Sorry but your complaints should be void if u look at kingsbane as a combo deck it aint OTK but it does need its pieces to come together. thats why its good against control. u aint seeing nobody saying otk decks should be nerfed.

Plus Kingsbane Rogue hard counters Big Priests keeping them in check and preventing wild of being a 90% big priest. thats why theres aggro too so it counters Kingsbane. All in a good day of balance.

that aside this seems to be a case for the salt thread. Can some kind soul redirect this fellow to the salt thread? thx

 Your entire comment is full of flawed logic. You call his argument invalid because he calls it a combo deck.. Then you describe it and compare it to OTK decks? Congrats you invalidated your own point genius.

Moving on, did you even read what deck he said he was playing? Not Big Priest. He's mad about the lack of interactivity he has as a control player to do anything. Kingsbane is a soft-hard counter to every non-aggro deck. 

Just to be clear, I don't agree with a nerf on Kingsbane, but your comment was just painful to read.

I played a combination of Big Priest and Cubelock all the way to wild legend this season (from rank 25) and I was way more annoyed by the brain dead Even Shaman, Odd Paladin, and Odd Rogue decks. The only reason it's hard for control decks to beat Kingsbane/Mill Rogue is because if you play any control deck you're forced to run 50 useless boardwipe and removal cards or you lose against 90% of the meta. Aggro decks prey on combo decks, Combo decks prey on control, and Control (kinda but not really) preys on aggro. 

Here's a simple solution. Give control decks boardwipes that are useful in the control matchup. Either Duskbreaker type creatures or boardwipes that have alternative effects.  

Also be prepared for the dark future of "Oops all boardclears" priest in a year or so from now if we keep seeing priest clears.

I've been F2P (Apart from welcome bundle) since right before the release of LOE and it's not even difficult to grind dust and craft multiple meta decks. Currently I play mostly wild and have a nearly all golden renolock as well as a half goldened renomage and razakus priest with plenty of leftover legendaries and epics. It's not that I'm extremely lucky, I just quickly learned how to manage my dust. 90% of the people I've talked to irl that complain about being F2P have terrible decision making. They craft cards on a whim, dust new ones with little thought, and never learn from their mistakes.

A conditional aldor peacekeeper with slightly better stats. Meh, priest has better cards, won't see any play. Very interesting arena card though.

I'd like to see it spawn two 3/2 imps with charge at the START of your turn, the quest isn't pro-active enough to be a finisher in a zoo deck.

Quote from Agithore >>

Quote from 17arkOracle >>

Tier 2.5. Will See Play if Elemental Decks See Play
Cards that will appear regularly in Elemental decks. Currently I am guessing that Elemental decks will not be in the meta (they remind me C'Thun decks; a good strong curve but without that extra brokenness), but even a single card can change that. Either way I figured they warrant their own tier.

 Since when did C'thun decks have a strong curve? Sure, you had the ability to pop out a minion on each turn, but most if not all of the minions were just trash Vanilla minions that have no chance of actually competing with what your opponent puts up. This is why C'Thun failed, because your board state would be so far behind by the time you actually played him that the entire strategy wouldn't matter. If we see Elementals being a bit more dynamic than that (ie: Not just Vanilla stats with a Divine Shield or Taunt added), then there is no comparison of the two.

Soggoth the Slitherer, leader of the Lispers of the Old Gods.