So about a year ago I did a "Pessimist's Guide to WoG," and I figured it was time to take another critical look at the upcoming set. I tried to rank the cards somewhat realistically, but I'm currently up for debate and am not opposed to moving cards around. As I found out last time too, the hardest part can just be trying to figure out what decks actually make it into the meta (I put a lot of Zoo cards in Tier 1, for example).
NOTE: Tier 1 cards aren't necessarily better than tier 2 cards, they just go in better decks. Tier 1 can be very "meh", they just happen to be cards I think will see play. Tier 1 is good cards in good decks, tier 2 is good cards in bad decks.
Tier 1. Will See Play Cards that will appear at least semi-regularly in decks that either are in the meta and have a decent chance or remaining, or decks that have a very good chance of entering the meta.
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, but honestly too few have been released to really say, and even just 1 really good card can change things.
I also owned a few other cards like the Card Captor one and The Spoils (which is more recent) but I never really played them. I also owned and played the Digimon CCG, which was pretty terrible, but give in the tie I assume it wasn't that obscure.
EDIT: There's something about the fact that the Sim City CCG used photographs that makes it weird...
Numbers simply don't scale evenly. No one would run a 10 cost 20/20 but everyone would run a 1 cost 10/10.
I'd prefer Flamewreathed with 1 more overload, but right now it's a fair card. It's bizarre how much hate it gets giving it's not even really freakin run anymore.
Metaltooth Leaper isn't really great. Sure it's amazing if you have board control, but if you have board control you're already winning. Goblin Blastmage is good for catch up, and Fireball is a better finisher. Ping is better if you really need to make a good trade. Mech decks too (especially later) also didn't run tooo many mechs. Granted they ran enough for it to be useful sure, but enough to make it like easily incredible.
Hunters I think just in general struggle for board control and draw, whereas Mages midrange/temponess meant they synergized a lot better with mechs. Mechs are more like zoo, than say pirates or murlocs, which are more the facefaceface Hunters want. Hunter also probably had better face decks, with things like Arcane Golem still around.
First of all you probably right to imply that in a democracy people with no skill run the show, as we may see and hear from the fresh inaugurate calling himself president of a country where HS was invented.
First wings I'd say yes, just so you have the ability to go buy the other wings later if you want to play in Wild (buying them is much more efficient than crafting the cards). I would say no to buying the entire though, it's just not really worth it until you have enough cards/playtime/experience to be "done" with Standard.
Seems fair to me. Especially since the extra 2 health makes it much harder to kill
I think the problem is Raid Leader is easily the weakest of the 3, and costs too much for it's stats and effect.
Part of the problem is just the effect is worthless if you have an empty board, and unlikely to be helpful if you only have one or two minions. Meanwhile if you have a near full board, you're probably already ahead anyway. (Though I do think Leokk is better than you give it credit for).
Probably bad. A lot of players feel obligated to work for those sort of rewards, and while that's fine for one of the ladders people might feel like they're being forced to grind the ladder twice over. It also means that Wild would fill with meta decks of people trying to reach a high rank for the rewards (though it's been suffering really badly lately, anyway).
Personally I think the advantage of grinding both ladders is you get to fight the "easy climb" at the beginning twice, where you can use more fun decks and get bigger win streaks, but I also only play to like rank 10. I also wouldn't mind the extra rewards since I do play both, but I can see why people might.
I disagree. It's not unlikely you'll have a weapon on turn 2 for Warriors and Rogues, and mechs are much easier to deal with. If you have control of the board later in the game for example, it's generally not too hard to trade away their mechs and then the 1/2 (especially with any destruction. Even early game this applies). Unless you have ooze though, it's easy for them to keep buccaneer as a 3/2.
There are only 23 quests that have more than 50 gold - 19 quests that are 60 gold, and 1 80 gold quest and 3 100 gold quests (plus a quest for a pack, but that doesn't count for gold)
There are 24 quests that are 40 gold and 24 quests that are 50 gold. So 1/3 of the time, if you re-roll a 50 gold quest, you will get less gold, 1/3 of the time, the same amount, and 1/3 of the time, you will get more. I don't really like those odds, but they may be okay for you. And over the long haul, it would probably even out.
You should never give up a 60 gold quest, as there is only a chance 5% chance of getting a better quest.
All the quests are listed here - http://hearthstone.gamepedia.com/Quest, although for the Dominance and Victory quests, it only shows one line on the chart, but there are 9 possible options.
So, I would recommend only re-rolling 40 gold quests, as then you would get a better quest 2/3 of the time. And even if you get another 40 gold quest, it is up to you to complete it or avoid it and re-roll the next day. Since you can only re-roll 1 quest per day, at some point you would need to complete a 40 gold quest to make room for a new one.
To really maximize gold production, you should be getting 30 wins per day (to get the 100 gold for wins), but that usually takes more time than people have. The other way would be to get good at arena and get at least 7+ wins each time to become infinite and never have to worry about gold (at least for buying packs).
Great analysis! And since you can't have a quest twice, you should only reroll 50g quests if the average of the other two is <50. So most of the time you probably shouldn't reroll them. But that requires that the distribution is actually random.
But you have to keep in mind of those quests that give more than 50g, a few them give more than 60g. Enough more that I believe it's worth rerolling even if both other quests are 50g or higher (unless they themselves are the 80g or higher quests).
(I would also argue that the pack is the equivalent of a 100g, since dust is dust.)
Cards like Call of the Wild, Abusive Sergeant, and Rockbiter get the most minor nerf possible done to them and they get thrown in the trash anyway. At least this way the people who love those cards can follow them into wild.
well Rockbiter Weapon's mana cost got doubled, that's pretty significant
True, but I think changing its damage to 2 would've also been significant, and changing it's mana cost to 2 but increasing its damage to 4 probably wouldn't have been a nerf.
It's more the numbers are so small, even the slightest change can ruin a card.
Cards like Call of the Wild, Abusive Sergeant, and Rockbiter get the most minor nerf possible done to them and they get thrown in the trash anyway. At least this way the people who love those cards can follow them into wild.
1
So about a year ago I did a "Pessimist's Guide to WoG," and I figured it was time to take another critical look at the upcoming set. I tried to rank the cards somewhat realistically, but I'm currently up for debate and am not opposed to moving cards around. As I found out last time too, the hardest part can just be trying to figure out what decks actually make it into the meta (I put a lot of Zoo cards in Tier 1, for example).
NOTE: Tier 1 cards aren't necessarily better than tier 2 cards, they just go in better decks. Tier 1 can be very "meh", they just happen to be cards I think will see play. Tier 1 is good cards in good decks, tier 2 is good cards in bad decks.
Tier 1. Will See Play
Cards that will appear at least semi-regularly in decks that either are in the meta and have a decent chance or remaining, or decks that have a very good chance of entering the meta.
Tier 2. Might See Play
Cards that will appear regularly in decks that are not currently in the meta, and may or may not enter the meta.
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, but honestly too few have been released to really say, and even just 1 really good card can change things.
Tier 3. Will Not See Play
Cards that might be experimented but will not appear in the long term meta.
0
I think there just needs to be PLAYABLE gimmicks...
0
Probably Magi-Nation.
I also owned a few other cards like the Card Captor one and The Spoils (which is more recent) but I never really played them. I also owned and played the Digimon CCG, which was pretty terrible, but give in the tie I assume it wasn't that obscure.
EDIT: There's something about the fact that the Sim City CCG used photographs that makes it weird...
2
Numbers simply don't scale evenly. No one would run a 10 cost 20/20 but everyone would run a 1 cost 10/10.
I'd prefer Flamewreathed with 1 more overload, but right now it's a fair card. It's bizarre how much hate it gets giving it's not even really freakin run anymore.
1
Metaltooth Leaper isn't really great. Sure it's amazing if you have board control, but if you have board control you're already winning. Goblin Blastmage is good for catch up, and Fireball is a better finisher. Ping is better if you really need to make a good trade. Mech decks too (especially later) also didn't run tooo many mechs. Granted they ran enough for it to be useful sure, but enough to make it like easily incredible.
Hunters I think just in general struggle for board control and draw, whereas Mages midrange/temponess meant they synergized a lot better with mechs. Mechs are more like zoo, than say pirates or murlocs, which are more the facefaceface Hunters want. Hunter also probably had better face decks, with things like Arcane Golem still around.
1
0
First wings I'd say yes, just so you have the ability to go buy the other wings later if you want to play in Wild (buying them is much more efficient than crafting the cards). I would say no to buying the entire though, it's just not really worth it until you have enough cards/playtime/experience to be "done" with Standard.
1
0
Probably bad. A lot of players feel obligated to work for those sort of rewards, and while that's fine for one of the ladders people might feel like they're being forced to grind the ladder twice over. It also means that Wild would fill with meta decks of people trying to reach a high rank for the rewards (though it's been suffering really badly lately, anyway).
Personally I think the advantage of grinding both ladders is you get to fight the "easy climb" at the beginning twice, where you can use more fun decks and get bigger win streaks, but I also only play to like rank 10. I also wouldn't mind the extra rewards since I do play both, but I can see why people might.
3
I feel like it should have the Beast tag.
0
I disagree. It's not unlikely you'll have a weapon on turn 2 for Warriors and Rogues, and mechs are much easier to deal with. If you have control of the board later in the game for example, it's generally not too hard to trade away their mechs and then the 1/2 (especially with any destruction. Even early game this applies). Unless you have ooze though, it's easy for them to keep buccaneer as a 3/2.
0
0
50g is the average, meaning (over a long enough period of time) there's no gain or loss from rerolling 50g quests.
0
0
Cards like Call of the Wild, Abusive Sergeant, and Rockbiter get the most minor nerf possible done to them and they get thrown in the trash anyway. At least this way the people who love those cards can follow them into wild.