Hearthpwn

Quote from SandsnakePrime >>

Quote from BarnacleEd >>

Quote from Thorgrander >>

Darn, Shame you can't have more than 1 deck during brawl. I've got tons of things I want to try. Like Tons!

So much this. There's too many ideas I want to try out and I can't settle on just one...really interesting brawl this time around!

 Edit deck: Delete, yes, build new deck.

 

REALLY???????

Refer to the following infographic:

This is true of any online game or community in general. As to why Hearthstone in particular seems to be "teh saltiest community ever Kapogchamp", I personally believe it's because of how visible the game is thanks to tournaments, streams, a large userbase - all of which simultaneously exacerbates the problem (as viewers of a match tend to emulate the behavior they see) and makes the issue all the more noticeable. Just my thoughts, of course.

Craft Dr. Boom asap.

As a less snark tip, watch some youtube videos or twitch streams of pro players. I found watching Trump's and Kripparian's arena runs to be pretty useful early on, especially when explaining why they made the choices they did.

Quote from Boldelar >>

The moment your Dark Peddler offers a Secretkeeper when you are against a Secret Paladin. Sweet >:D

This is the strangest damn decklist I've ever seen. And the most amazing part is it actually looks pretty solid...

I'm sadly lacking Tirion, Sylvanas, Justicar, Harrisson, and Quartermaster so I can't play the exact decklist. Might try out a budget-friendly version if you have any recommendations for possible replacements?

Agree with ones mentioned so far: Unstable Portal, Divine Favor, Dr. Boom (there's a reason he's called "Dr. 7" or "Dr. Balanced after all...blatantly too strong for the cost), Mistcaller (one card that overload would actually make sense on yet inexplicably doesn't have overload), and piloted shredder.

Throwing in a new contender that I don't think has yet been mentioned: Master Jouster. The joust mechanic has been mentioned as poorly designed, but imo  this card epitomizes what's wrong with it as winning the joust gives you a DRASTIC power boost while losing it makes the card extremely weak for the cost. This much of a power swing depending on what amounts to little more than luck is a questionable design choice at best. 

As for good design: agree with Loatheb. Not too difficult to acquire, fair stats, has a potentially game-changing effect.

Quote from OctavianP >>

KILL ALL THE FACE HUNTARDS. DEATH AND PAIN TO THEIR FAMILLY. BURN THEIR HOUSES AND RAPE THEIR GFS AND MOMS!

Gave this deck a try yesterday as I had the "win 5 games as druid" quest. Only took 7 games to get those 5 wins, pretty enjoyable as well. I did substitute in Dark Wispers over Sir Finley Mrrgglton since I don't have the latter and had never actually tried using the former in a deck. Worked out relatively well - this deck provides plenty of targets for the buff option or you get to flood the board with wisps for even more Soul of the Forest or Power of the Wild targets.

My only complaint is that Knife Juggler didn't make the decklist. Not sure what you'd cut to put it in though.

Edit: Cut 2x Innervate for 2x juggler instead. Quite pleased with the results.

Looks interesting, or at least as interesting as a face deck can be. Planning to give it a shot with a pair of minor tweaks.

Remove: Nerubian Egg, 1x Arcane Golem. 

Add: Loatheb, 1x Argent Horserider.

Egg seems too slow/situational, swap it out for Loatheb which (as discussed here) seems generally more useful. Arcane golem can backfire spectacularly if you're not careful in my experience, but does make a great finisher so keeping 1 around makes sense. Horserider seems generally more useful to me, however, especially if you can get the Defender of Argus buff on it.

It's very simple. Scissors cuts paper, paper covers rock, rock crushes lizard, lizard poisons Spock, Spock smashes scissors, scissors decapitates lizard, lizard eats paper, paper disproves Spock, Spock vaporizes rock, and, as it always has, rock crushes scissors.

It is obviously not that simple, and you should already know it, since you are playing since closed beta.

Don't follow sites like that blindly. Use your own judgement.

There are much more strategy that goes with a seemingly simple mechanics. I went consecutive 27 wins on NA server, 13 consecutive wins on EU server, 8 consecutive wins on Asia server.

For those having trouble winning, perhaps it would help to know that:

Rook counters Knight. Knight counters Bishop. Bishop counters Rook. Queen trumps all. 

Those are key pieces and you have to know their uses.

Rook is basically a better Pawn. They will eventually win over Pawn, and they might bait out opponent's Knight. It is a counter to Knight because it takes 1 Pawn + 1 Rook to take out a Knight and if opponent run their own Knight into your Rook, then all it takes is just 1 Pawn to take that damaged Knight out. However, Knight requires 2 Pawns or a Rook to kill enemy's Rook. It is also at the expense of it's own 2 Hp. Thus Rook actually threatens Knight even on opponent's turn.

A lot of the times, I see people using Knight to take on Rook. It seems justifiable, but it isn't actually a winning play simply because your Knight will easily gets traded by Pawn next turn. The only time Knight should take on Rook is when you have a Bishop on your board ready to heal your damaged Knight back up, or you have overwhelming board advantage that opponent can't get to your Knight next turn.

Rook is just a bait for some players to waste their Knight on. When opponent Rook is only damaging Pawns, you lose by sending your Knight to "protect" your Pawns and kill off their Rook. That is the trap as Knight (4 mana) is of higher value than Rook (3 mana). Knight threatens Queen. Knight can easily assist in killing Bishop. You should not waste Knight just to kill Rook (just a stronger Pawn).

Knight should be use as a removal and you should use it to kill Bishop or Queen, not opponent's Knight (even though it seems fair, but if you're only playing your Knight as a response to enemy's Knight that already done something, then you're losing value and tempo). You should also not use it to remove Rook as mentioned above, and last but not least, Knight shouldn't be play on curve just to kill Pawns. That is the worse play and the reason why you seems to keep losing your board.

Bishop is there for defensive play. A lot of the times, you want to utilize those double attacks. But that isn't always the case if you can have a turn to heal your pieces. It is a counter to Rook because it negates the damage that Rook dealt last turn.

I have a game where both our board was full. 

My board was 5 Pawns and 2 Bishops. Opponent's board was 2 Rooks, 1 Bishop, 4 Pawns. Most people might actually think opponent is ahead as his overall chess pieces are of higher value than mine. However, Bishops shines in defensive (no dual attack) play and is a direct counter to Rook. If you work out the math, I have a maximum heal of 8 and maximum damage of 5 per turn. Opponent have a maximum heal of 4 and a maximum of 8 damage per turn.

For that game, I am the only one that can break that stalemate, because I can kill his Bishop if I wanted to, or if I do want to kill other pieces, I can do it eventually since I am churning out damage while opponent's damage gets negated.

While most of the time, you want to use Bishop to heal other key pieces, but if you're not having the best of draw, then just adapt. Dual attack is good but Bishop doesn't have to require dual attack to benefit. So if you can force/trap your opponent into playing card only to lose their dual attack, then you've successfully utilize Bishop's main strategy of defensive play.

Likewise, if you have the best of draw, you don't just throw them on curve because you can. Chances are, you lose value by presenting your threats without establishing any control over the board. What good is a Knight that can only kill Pawns? What good is a Queen if it only kills 2 Pawns and die easily to enemy's Queen/Knight + Rook/Pawns?

Overall, I just want to say this is probably one of the better Brawl, but perhaps most people don't pay much attention to Brawl simply because of the little incentives to be good at it... If only Brawl have a winning Gold streak... Then perhaps people might actually be interested in some of the Brawl and learn to be good at it for the daily 100g.

I think is ok as it is. It couldn't have been done better. It's just that it gets very repetitive after the 2nd and 3rd game

RNG brawls "Wahhh all RNG no skill involved."

Skill Brawl "Wahh this is boring"

I think you're on to something!  This also explains why they nerfed Call of the Wild instead of Lorewalker Cho!  Those greedy pigs!

You will need this book!

Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn

I have little to no interest in having a full collection of any of the sets but I absolutely want to have everything I need to make whatever deck I want to play.

I also have a thing for golden cards and I've started going through the Classic set and crafting gold versions of all the 'best' cards, things like Acolyte of Pain, Loot Hoarder, Doomsayer, Sylvanas, Ragnaros etc. And also of cards I love - Ice Lance (love Freeze Mage), Malygos etc.

I only have about 5 - 10 cards to go before I have all the good stuff from Classic in golden and then I will probably start crafting some of the best stuff from the expansions and adventures. I was about to craft a golden Yogg a day before the nerf announcement so glad I waited.

Anyway, not sure where I fit into on the pole options but that's what I like to do.

PS - nice to see a different topic other than the moaning or frankly lame suggestions on how everyone thinks they can improve the game!