Hearthpwn

Quote from vionicesca >>

It doesn't because the tracker only knows the cards in your deck that you've put there. It doesn't track Roaring Torches either.

Last year I recorded a sample of 300 quests (first received and rerolls) across 2+ months and 2 accounts. I ended up getting a 40g quest 66% of the time. This was after the 50g quests were implemented (but before the "play a friend" quest of course) - so in sheer numbers there were fewer 40g quests than the other values combined. This indicates that 40g quests have always had an inflated roll chance vs the other values. Whether that inflation has increased? I don't know. I probably won't record another sample, but you're welcome to use my results as a baseline if you want to.

[We want] priest to be decided as good or bad depending on what the metagame is doing, and not necessarily based on widely varying degrees of card quality between different expansions.

So Priest not getting the Shaman treatment anytime soon I guess.

Quote from jcboyle82 >>

Thanks for the direction to that site. I've uploaded one of my replays in case anyone has a couple minutes. Here is the link:

http://www.zerotoheroes.com/r/hearthstone/57747d28e4b0b95d6185e680/battleboyle-arena-20160628-paladin-classic-aggro

Thanks again for the advice!

Quote from Scipio_77 >>

 Standard seems like it will be very boring, there really isn't enough cards in HS yet for this. I mean, the card total of HS is like half MTG standard.

It seems mostly like an excuse not to balance content or design it properly, tbh. Which will of course also lead to wild mode being useless.

Quote from SjaakHD >>

That means that the only viable reason for Entomb not being a powercreep over Recycle would be that Druid already has plenty of good (big) removal spells, while Priest doesn't. 

Your entire argument is predicated on this concept that is completely incorrect. The goal of balancing classes in Hearthstone is not to give each of them an equal number of equally powerful cards for every situation. Classes are intended to have strengths and weaknesses differing from other classes. Priests are meant to be a whole lot better at minion removal and board control than Druids. Druids are meant to be a whole lot better at ramping into big cards and dictating the tempo of play than a Priest. This is an entirely intended facet of the game, that classes play differently and feel different to play against because they're good at certain things and bad at others.

Powercreep is when new cards are introduced that make old cards obsolete. For example, before GvG many decks included Chillwind Yeti, afterwards those same decks replaced that card with Piloted Shredder because it's objectively better in basically every circumstance. Chillwind Yeti essentially became unplayable in any deck except those belonging to players who do not have Piloted Shredder. Entomb has exactly no impact on the playability of Recycle because the two cards cannot be played in the same deck. You are never choosing between using Entomb or Recycle - so they cannot powercreep each other.

First of all they never actually mention how big the number is. 1000? 2000? How about all the accounts that play through the tutorial but quit right after once they see all the locked content they'd need to buy? What about the accounts that stopped due to undertaker hunter and never returned? 
What are those numbers? Why doesn't he talk about them? 

Yeah, obviously we don't know the numbers but I would have to imagine that far more people quit playing the game due to being unable to build a halfway decent deck until they've opened like 100 packs and bought both adventures. At least I know that's where a number of my friends got frustrated with the game.

How much does it really help to "teach new players about bad cards" by making 75% of the cards they have access to when they start the game bad? It seems to me that they'd learn a lot more about the game if they had some decent tools to work with and see how they interact. I'd also imagine you'd retain a lot more players if they could jump in and feel like they can play a powerful deck and compete at the lower ranks instead of just immediately getting stomped by people with bigger collections.

You know, Ben's video is so heavily focused on the reasons why he doesn't like nerfing cards and doesn't want to do it - it makes me think that they intentionally did a bad nerf to make people think any nerf is bad. What other explanation is there? He says in the video that their intention was to make Warsong Commander "not be played" and that he knows the card isn't good anymore. He says those things, it's not like he doesn't know that it's trash, he wanted it to be trash - the only question is why.

Quote from Bleu >>

Quote from Frostraven >>

Quote from WoggleEU >>

theres probably alot of other people who said this already but they nerfed it mostly because warsong limited what cards they could make without those cards being too broken with it and I agree that warsong was a bad card from the start, charge minions arent that fun to play against, so this nerf is justified in my eyes.

 

...

The problem is not that the card was nerfed.

The problem is that, instead of balancing the card, they dragged her out in the streets, pulled out a set of sub-machinegun and spread Warsong Commander's brains out all over the city streets. And continued firing at the corpse until their magazines were empty.

I feel bad about witnessing this. Who's next?
Will they make Ysera 2/10 anytime soon?
Malygos 4/8?
Dr. Boom 4/2?

I mean: They killed her so brutally, I have trouble trusting them at all right now.
There's balancing, and there's horrific and terrible violence. This was not balancing.

Because her effect was game breaking. In the Video Ben even states that there were / are cards that they wanted to do, but she would completely ruin them. 

The nerf is fine, calm down. 

Why is it ever fine to change a card and make it useless in every facet of the game? There are tons of ways they could've changed the effect to be not game-breaking while not making Warsong Commander worse than Raid Leader. Change the existing effect to be more limiting, give it a new effect and give it better stats, give it a new effect and reduce its mana cost, keep the stats and mana cost but give it a new effect that isn't hysterically awful - just to name a few.

The only answer to this question, and any question about RNG in Hearthstone - is that RNG can have a very large impact over any individual, or small sample of games. You can and will win and lose games based almost entirely on RNG. Skill has a greater impact over a large number of games. Over a long period of time the luck factor will even out, if you play optimally over that period you'll win a lot more often than you lose - play poorly and you'll lose a lot more often than you win.