Hearthpwn

Great idea but we all know Blizzard is too greedy to do any of this. Remember recently they tried to sneak out with Tess' nerf.   

He plays Hearthstone with deck recipes decks. :)

A cheaper Emperor for mechs.

Quote from danez >>

Correct me if im wrong, but this is a guaranteed spell in shaman between spellstone, bloodlust and volcano. they dont have any other 5+ cost spells in standard at the moment i think

 You forgot the new Shaman spell.

You can put Goldshire Footman along with core druid spells and it suddenly becomes a new viable archetype. 

Because warrior is not druid.

Bloodlust, Volcano and Lesser Sapphire Spellstone

Pretty good card overall.

Priest keep getting trash tier cards that are so clunky, while Druid keep getting cards that draw their whole combo on turn 4 and game is over by turn 10. Priest is the worst card currently in standard and Blizzard keep printing garbage cards for it. 

Only redemption I see for this card is to cheat out Reckless experimenter and then play lots of deathrattles and copy them with this card.

That's how most popular online game communities were, are and always will be. Hearthstone is no different, people will find some reason to complain and/or spread negativity.

1. That's a common fallacy, while most aggro decks are not among the toughest decks to play they can still be quite challenging and skill intensive. Yesterday I played inner fire priest against odd paladin, he had enough on board to put me on 2 hp, I had one 4/6 drake, radiant elemental and tar creeper with full combo and a shadow vision in hand. If he had went for face I had fair chances to get mass dispel from SV and OTK him. Sadly for me, he traded his minions and played vinecleaver.  Maybe this is not the best example but it does goes to show that all aggro matches are not full face. 

2. Those types of people are in every game ever that has a ladder system. Ignore them.

3. While I would prefer if everybody made their own decks, I don't think that's possible. Hearthstone's monetization model encourages netdecking, most people don't have all cards neither they would spend $100+ on every expansion acquiring them, so they netdeck.

People copy top decks and builds in other games also but there they have the option to explore on their own also. Take Path of Exile, Dota 2 and Blizzard's own Heroes Of The Storm for example, yes people copy top builds there also but they are not restricted to coping in those games because of money they spend. I don't think Hearthstone is completely P2W, but it certainly encourages netdecking, so it's Blizzard's fault more than people who netdec.

If you copy a charge minion it will have charge.

Discarding cards from opponents hand is something completely different than killing half the deck (btw. as far as I understand the warlocks card, it's affecting both decks). Just play magic against a discard deck when it works out for them. You can't do shit and you are completely powerless. Whatever you keep gets discarded, whatever you play gets countered. 

Killing the deck still leaves you with cards and something to do. Can also feel bad, but it is still not the same as discarding.

2 players's stats is not even enough to build a conspiracy theory, let alone a serious argument.

It is just bad luck, but you are letting your subjective point of view being more relevant than it is, making it universal in order to feed your own bias.

Step back, accept bad luck, and you will realise that your situation is not as dramatic as you think it is: you still own an enviable collection.

PS: I'd be extremely happy to drop Tinkmaster Overspark and finally test it as a pseudo-Polymorph in Wild against all that resurrection BS.

I'm having an absolute blast with control priest. That deck is bonkers and shrugs hunters off like they're nothing. 

Even paladin is really fun too and never unfavored against hunter. There are so many decks you can play. Sure you face a lot of hunters, but none of them are unbeatable. 

I just find it funny how literally everyone thinks they just know what's better for a game. I don't even care whether you're right or wrong it's just constantly all I ever see on these forms anymore is things would be better this way or that way or if this was introduced or if this was taken away.

It's a stupid card game guys. It's literally just a digital RNG generator with a slight hint of skill. Good cards, bad cards, standard cards, wild cards, none of them actually make a difference.

Quote from Nickfuryusn >>

long gone are the days were fatigue actually played a part in the game. I'm just bummed 

Quite sure a few days ago I read some post (don't remember if here or some other forum, sorry), by someone lamenting most games going to fatigue. Not taking sides or anything here, but still... I find this kind of funny.

Quote from user-26847294 >>

Hearthstone favors aggro compared to other TCGs. The fact that the attacker chooses the defender makes you able to continously go face, then end games quickly. Combined with the fact that aggro decks are usually cheap and rather simple to play makes them attactive to especially player with limited resources like f2p players and players with minimal time to spend on the game. 

Do you think or reread what you write?  'Hearthstone favors aggro compared to other TCGs' If that is the case it is a developers card design choice, NOT game design. Wonder why in the world you even think that they print cards just at random, with no reason at all, as long as it is question-aggressive and let the community sort out the decks. Do you really think developers are that stupid? 

The fact that HS is a question game doesn't explain why answers are deliberately insufficient. That is also a card design choice. It also doesn't explain why questions should be enhanced by Burn, Buffs, Chargers, Summon, Weapons and Discover cards (BBCSWD).

That HS is a question game is just an interpretation for its aggressive state. You could also argue that it needs more balance between questions and answers.

The top of meta is decided by the player base. People discover what is strong, then play that. Then people discover effective counters and starts to play that.

Who said that? Some game developers on youtube? If I say that the meta is not decided but executed, that is not a conspiracy theory but a reasonable assumption that you and all the fanboys alike might not favor, but point to card designers thinking what kind of meta they want to be constructed for various beneficial reasons (identifying possible nerfs, enhancing pack selling, marketing etc.) Do you really think designers are that stupid that they really don't assess or want to know how that meta will develop up front and don't want to steer that?

Worth noting is also the fact that the meta has not always been dominated by aggro (Druid and Cubelock meta).

Right on, true but other meta share the same polarized win condition mechanic: Kill you as fast as possible vs. If you fail you are dead by default.

Is it really so difficult to slow down the game, raise, the skill floor, diversify win conditions, let skill decided the game?

 It has absolutly nothing to do with card design at all. You could remove all aggressive tools and people would still play the fastsest deck, it makes grinding more efficient.

I don't believe the devs are dumb at all nor do I think they just print cards at random. Assuming they did would be blatantly ignorant. We see new mechanics and synergies every expansion which also looks to implement existing cards to be as effective as possible. That's not just random printing of cards. But fact still stands that an expansion is finished months before it is released meaning that Blizzard doesn't have a "100%-idea" which meta they release it into. I even posted a link earlier explaining this. I don't disagree with the fact that Blizzard needs the meta to benefit them for the very reasons you list and obviously they want to steer towards that meta. In fact I even already said so when we compared Blizzard to Commodus. So I can see you agree with me on that front.

The meta is executed indeed. Executed on a decision made by the players; they want to win. How do you win? Kill your opponent before he kills you; 'as fast as possible' to use your own words. Players discover some decks does this better than others and thus they play those decks. Then some time into an expansion an another effective deck can be discovered by the players which shakes up the meta, this was the case with cubelock. In this meta aggro was less effective due to the defensive tools most of players ran in Cubelock, so it was faster to climb while not playing aggro.

The meta was shaped by the players decision to win and you win by killing your opponent. That is game design. People play whatever they have discoverd to be efficient in the current meta cause, that is the easiest way of winning. So the meta is shaped by the players to best take advantage of the way the game is designed.

You are making this more complicated than it is. 

Edit: On a side note, Blizzard has clearly tuned down the amount of aggression being pushed into the game. Just look at the almost non-existing amount og Charge cards and synergy Blizzard has put in the game resently, while pushing a great amount of rush cards.

Quote from LastMann >>

Quote from Xynot >>

You obviously never played Diablo 3 in the RMAH era.  The Chinese secondary market fully supports 'trades'.

 So your concern is Chinese firms hoarding legendaries to sell to players for real money? That does sound like it’d be an issue... But if Blizzard is still getting its cut from the Chinese companies opening packs to get the legendaries, wouldn’t that still work out?

 they won't open packs.  The problem is that dusting and crafting exist.

A new account gets more than enough free cards and starting quest rewards to craft a couple of legendaries.  Right now this is a good thing as it guarantees that a new player can, with enough research (as any F2Per should be doing) get a good strong deck right from the get go and help establish them into the game. 

Introduce trading and that quickly turns into doom.  A person can, with those features, create a new account, run it through the basic quests, get a few key cards you are aiming to hoard, then sell them on the market.  This can then be automated and, thus, you can develop multiple bots to farm cards quickly and easily and flood the market with cards. The market then tanks, making all cards worthless to sell while the servers get packed full of fake accounts.

This is not a hypothetical doomsday situation.  This is exactly what happens on most MMOs.  It's what's happening in Fallout 76 as well by how I hear (though that has other issues making the situation, not be worse but get worse faster.  

You don't hear this in card games because they always adopt one of three models: the TCG, the CCG, or the LCG.  This is a CCG, a Collecting Card Game.  No Trading, but instead you have a mechanic to obtaining whatever cards you want.  Games like MTG (offline) and Artifact are TCGs. No crafting but a Trading system.  The third is a Life Card Game where you get all of the cards right away, no collecting in any way.

Basically they solve it by not combining a trading system with a system to collect cards for free.  

Then there's the fact that it's a massive programming project that involves player cash and the card economy.  All it takes is one bug, one slip up unfound, to have a nightmare of scammed players, lots cards, lost money, and angry customers seeking lawsuits.  

So we're not talking 'possible issues'.  We're talking a guaranteed extremely difficult issue that they are already well aware of (thanks to WoW), the potential of a scandal that will permanently scar the community, and for a system that offers little profit, won't help most of the community (if you think you can just pass off that Millhouse and some random epics for a zilliax you are in for a surprise), and has already been proven a failure that nearly destroyed the Diablo brand.

In short: if you want trading, you want a Trading Card game, like Artifact.  If you want HS style card crafting along with trading, and you DON'T have a history of the nightmares MMO styled games had, and you weren't really willing to read the above, then ..just trust me.

No.  

OTK pally isn't unwinnable against Clone Priest if you run Thekal.  They're favored for sure but i've won a handful of them by stacking my life really high and they don't build a perfect spellstone (maly and velen).  Thekal is kind of meh against aggro but it's so good against any deck that does burst damage because if they aren't pressuring you then you can get your health total to 50+ with good Kangor plays.  It's situational but it's an out you might as well go for.

But yeah Exodia pally is kind of like that.  It's a very finicky win condition which is why it needed a busted card like time out to be somewhat reliable.  Having controlled a game to the point where it's time to win with my combo and then falling flat on my face is kind of fun, it is reminiscent of shudderwock.  I've never managed to lose to any kind of odd warrior though.  Perhaps you spent your resources a little too liberally because you thought it was a sure win? I've lost to big spell mages like that before, using removal or control tools for tempo because I thought i couldn't lose and then my combo comes too slow and i get spammed by water elementals.  

I like running the Lynessa/Blessing of Kings package because you can just play the beatdown against a lot of decks by spamming Zola's Lynessa's. 

Win rates are overall statistics though.  If you know a bad matchup well then your win rate is actually higher than the average win rate you see on hsreplay.  For example the control priest is greatly unfavored against odd quest warrior apparently but i've won that matchup more often than not by just hedging against their removal well and stealing nice targets like Direhorn with cabal shadow priest.  If you control their armor, get an alex that does 15 damage, you can burn them before they burn you after they play their quest reward.