Hearthpwn

Quote from Ryan_Sechrets >>

Yes, I think they do playtesting. Obviously.

Please note that you are basing your opinions on zero playtesting. I dunno, how about we wait until we actually play games with the cards before judging.

Quote from Dr_Scaphandre >>

Quote from Ryan_Sechrets >>

Yes, I think they do playtesting. Obviously.

Please note that you are basing your opinions on zero playtesting. I dunno, how about we wait until we actually play games with the cards before judging.

 Then how the fuck did cards like Undertaker and Dr. Boom go unnoticed?

I imagine they added the sparkle to the goon decks so you can start feeling panic as you know they have a bunch of beefed up minions coming. But I agree, it is a drawback for the goons cards. 

Quote from Seagull0 >>

I hope I'm wrong, everyone. But I think I'm right.

Suspicion: The OP thinks that Blizzard does not want their game to do well and so they skip important aspects of PvP gameplay such as playtesting.

Clearly the devs are a much smaller group of people than the playerbase and given that while we are figuring a meta out they have to prepare (new code for new card effects, as well as coming up with new card ideas / mechanics), test how these mechanics work in game (i.e. if they behave correctly in-game) and then finally test balance (by pitting what they come up with against the meta decks) I would understand the fact that broken cards are occasionally introduced into the game. They have way less time and resources (I mean people) to test the game than the entire playerbase (the millions of people are much more likely to refine lists to perfection, which is when the strongest decks in the meta are determined).

I have been critical of Blizzard for not properly balancing the game, but the way you are doing it is wrong. MSG will push new ideas and ways of creating decks and thus it is very difficult to predict what will happen and even harder to have full-proof playtesting (due to the limited amount of people / time available for it). The kind of criticism I would understand is when you have a clearly strong archetype that continues to be supported until it becomes broken (such as the Midrange Shaman archetype that was given Spirit Claws and Maelstrom Portal, which gave the last push to make this deck strong against its weaker matchups against Aggro decks). However, I think you are over-reacting in this specific scenario since new ways to play are being explored and thus playtesting can't be that efficient (with other expansions it was much easier to test by trying to fit the new cards in already existing archetypes, which made it easier to achieve semi-refined deck, whereas now they have to start with even less information than they usually have).

Jade is not broken, it's slow and can't kill anything before turn 10. It will get farmed by aggro and combo decks.... You're deducting this from the game of the livestream but you didn't even analyzed properly this game. The Jade Druid is playing against a slow paladin deck that doesn't play anything the 3 first turns and it doesn't start pumping big minions until at least turn 12 or 13....

They definitely test, but imo they need a bigger pool of testers.  

There's probably 100 or so players testing the game, so it can't cover all the decks.  They need to factor that by 10x but then there's the issue of leaking cards.

In Naxx and GvG the cards were overpowered, and it seems like in subsequent expansions the cards are all slightly underpowered.

Quote from furiousferret >>

They definitely test, but imo they need a bigger pool of testers.  

There's probably 100 or so players testing the game, so it can't cover all the decks.  They need to factor that by 10x but then there's the issue of leaking cards.

In Naxx and GvG the cards were overpowered, and it seems like in subsequent expansions the cards are all slightly underpowered.

Quote from Elka >>

Suspicion: blizzard dont have enough people, so monkeys design cards for some classess.

They definitely do play test. You can see it in the fact that things people are crying to be broken (C'Thun, Flamewreathed Faceless, Emperor Thaurissan) didn't in fact break the game, even though they were really good, and that things people don't expect to be broken turned out to be. If they don't play test at all, then it would be the reverse.

I fully expect this same trend to continue in MSG. The main clan mechanics themselves won't break the game, but some other card that we didn't see coming would.

Quote from Seagull0 >>

I don't think that it's in any way possible that team 5 would release cards such as those in MSG with proper play testing, absolutely no way.

The Jade mechanic's drawback is that its cards do slightly less than what they should do for their mana cost, and in return you summon a minion that keeps growing by 1 for every time you use those cards. But this drawback, quite frankly and easily noticeable, is hardly significant at all.

I think that if they preformed at least 30 playtest games with Jade mechanic decks it would be plain obvious that the mechanic, as it is, is completely broken. So my suspicion is that they didn't do proper play testing for the cards, if any at all.

Another noticeable and VERY CLEAR indication of no play testing is the Goons' glow/sparkle mechanic. I don't know if they're completely incompetent in understanding how hearthstone is played, but as the thread about the sparkle mechanic put it perfectly, there's a natural disadvantage at playing these hand buff cards, which shouldn't exist!! If they've done proper play testing they should've realised this.

So do you think that they performed proper play testing to these cards and mechanics before announcing them?

blizzard doesnt playtest well enough.

so, what are you gonna do about it? nothing? okay then.

apparently they don't test the pack opening. --- lol.