Hearthpwn

Duels too. Literally any mode right now is highly unbalanced. No surprise given the power level difference between classes and archtypes in Titans! I stopped playing the game again yesterday. After some good duels runs, but it's no fun at all to play against the same 2 classes every time (shaman/hunter in duels, mage/dk in arena)

That's what happens when you play your super cool, non-creative tier 1 or 2 deck and your opponent can predict your plays.

I have built a warlock achievement deck and people had no idea what to do against it. Long story short, I was able to keep Sargeras on the board for more than 1 turn in 90% of the times I played him. People don't expect it in a crappy deck lol. It's also your timing. And let's be honest, playing a 3 mana Sargeras on turn 6 is just disgusting

The warrior problem is more a problem of mage/shaman/relic dh crazy turns or OTKs on one end of the spectrum and grindier, more value-based control decks like warlock and priest on the other end. Warrior is somewhere in between but very rarely able to survive damage-based OTKs or outvalue the control decks. If warrior had a Sargeras-type card or if there was better spell disruption in the format, ctrl warrior could become high tier rather quickly. I assume you can build a pretty nasty anti-aggro ctrl warrior deck right now, but such deck just fails against anything else

Nerfing Alibi to 3 mana and not nerfing hunter or shaman at all is kinda ridiculous

So this means I will not play Arena for a long time

a mana reduction cap to (1).

Been suggesting this for years here and for months in other card games. Developers never learn. I am a fan of combo decks in general, though. You could make effects a little stronger but not reducable to 0 and be completely fine. But nope

Quote from Scorpyon >>

Unpopular opinion incoming :
Hands down, the worst and most uninspiring card ever made has to be the original C'Thun when it first came out. 
Was the most boring and overused finisher for me - forced the meta at the time to be 100% C'thun decks with little variation and almost ended my enjoyment of Hearthstone right there. 
Fortunately it was saved by the arrival of the next expansion (G&G I think it might have been)

 Maybe I am remembering this wrongly, but was OG C'thun even played a lot? I remember especially druids and slower ctrl decks using it but I also remember that the Old Gods meta was pretty good with other potential finishers like N'Zoth that were more popular at the time. I could be wrong though

Literally what I said. It's not turn 9, it's turn 7 if you coin it on 5 and turn 8 if you don't coin it. All of this while assuming that you have the card in hand by then. On a sidenote, it's a dangerous card to slower decks because the secrets and the cost increase can protect this long enough to make the cannon fire. Aggro decks (if they have the board) should have no trouble clearing this

Yeah, I think people are already sleeping on this card because the titans look flashy in comparison. I can't see a world where this is no auto-include in pretty much every ctrl or combo mage deck. Frost + Arcane + Fire is very easy, but with random spell generation, 5-7 will be possible. And it starts at 1, so you just need two spell schools to make this a good card

Quote from Mihailm86 >>

Quote from Reinan23 >>

Just dont play arena, it's a waste of time.

Arena is fun since you realize it needs SKILL and is NOT just a randomfest. Why not play it? Best mode in the game IMO. And I doubt there are any bots on Arena, though I have not played this mode for a while so... I don't know, I just don't believe. It would be strange if there would be any bots. Maybe it's time to check.

 I would have agreed some years ago but from what I see right now, the skill part is no longer true. I have had an absolutely disgusting shaman draft that went only 7-3 just because I went 2nd and drew terribly. That deck would have gone 12-0 very easily in the past. Stuff like triple Party Animal with a menagerie deck, the 7 cost spell, the colossus, random card generation that creates legendary win cons like 2 of the 3 drop that discovers a legendary minion, Rotgill, etc. Also, it's quite insane how strong some decks are compared to the average draft. My last run was a 1-3 and in my last game, my rogue opponent literally started the game with 4 constructed cards with synergy (concoctions). The entire game ended with them playing 2 cards that are not in the meta right now. 2! It was a ridiculous game. And the dude I beat in that run had 5(!) Swashburglers. What the heck lol

EDIT: All Mercs have been datamined and posted elsewhere, so there's no reason to keep this list updated. Thanks for coming!

I haven't been able to find a concise, organized list, so I made one.

Caster (19)

• Rare (8)
  • Blink Fox
  • Bru'kan
  • Lady Anacondra
  • Millhouse Manastorm
  • Morgl the Oracle
  • Tamsin Roame
  • Varden Dawngrasp
  • Xyrella
• Epic (5)
  • Antonidas
  • Brightwing
  • Natalie Seline
  • Prophet Velen
  • Shadow Hunter Vol'jin
• Legendary (6)
  • Alexstrasza
  • Anduin Wrynn
  • Gul'dan
  • Jaina Proudmoore
  • Malfurion Stormrage
  • Ragnaros

Fighter(17)

• Rare (7)
  • Blademaster Samuro
  • Kurtrus Ashfallen
  • Old Murk-Eye
  • Rathorian
  • Rokara
  • Scabbs Cutterbutter
  • Tavish Stormpike
• Epic (5)
  • Baron Geddon
  • King Krush
  • Saurfang
  • Tyrande
  • Warmaster Voone
• Legendary (5)
  • Diablo
  • Illidan Stormrage
  • Rexxar
  • Sylvanas Windrunner
  • Valeera Sanguinar

Protector (16)

• Rare (3)
  • Cariel Roame
  • Corneilus Roame
  • Guff Runetotem
• Epic (7)
  • Cairne Bloodhoof
  • Gruul
  • King Mukla
  • Mannoroth
  • Mutanus
  • Tirion Fordring
  • Varian Wrynn
• Legendary (6)
  • Garrosh Hellscream
  • Grommash Hellscream
  • Lich King, The
  • Lord Jaraxxus
  • Thrall
  • Uther

It surprises me that these numbers are not more symmetrical. I'm guessing they had some kind of lore-based criteria when assigning rarities -- for example, all the original Hearthstone heroes are legendary, while all the Book of Mercenaries heroes are rare. But it seems like some of the epic protectors could have been rare instead, to even things out.

Of course, everything in the videos is subject to change, so it's possible rarities and even roles could shift a bit before October 12.

Anyway, if you see any errors or omissions, please let me know, and I'll be happy to adjust the list.

Ok, this is my last comment in this thread and i wash my hands from this incel toxicity.

I get it, we all have lives and responsibilities, i really get it. I am engineer myself and i use games and forums to vent of my stress from my really demanding work. So i completely understand someone who would either completely skip this nuanced and difficult issue or simply wait for the trial before taking a stance. They are both completely understandable behaviors’.

But bitching about "DoPaMinE DoSes" and trying to make the issue irrelevant "ShIT hApPeNs" ? You are either entitled little pricks who put their small rush before people's real pain and problems or misogynistic incels who think harassment is no big deal and use logical fallacies to support their stupid reasoning. Take your pick. There are comments attacking the victims for speaking out for f*ck sake...

I'm generally not one to comment on this sort of thing, but these streamers are perfectly justified in withholding their card releases as far as I'm concerned. They are doing what they can to call attention/bring awareness to workplace discrimination and moreover to stand against it. If some people are upset that they can't see some cards on their virtual TCG a little earlier than they would otherwise and don't think that standing up to one of the largest social issues we currently face in America is worthy of that relatively trivial inconvenience, then frankly I think they should reconsider their priorities. This is bigger than Hearthstone people, and it's certainly bigger than getting a sneak preview of some virtual cards you think might be cool.

I think any sensible person would agree. This year we already had the Zalae affair, and now this. Even so, I think it is clear that this is a problem that goes beyond Blizzard Activision, it is about us as a society and how we can establish guidelines so that in our small communities these things are not repeated.

Quote from P4dge >>

"What's your point?"

The point was clear, it's just pointing out why looking at it in that way is a nonsense.

You openly make a whiny, salty thread and then say its sad that people can't have conversation. No, conversation can easily be had but when you open a thread you set the tone for the conversation that follows. If you had made a thread that genuinely just wanted to discuss the card then my reply would have been in kind but you didn't, you even openly say you didn't. So when you make a salty post, you're probably going to get a higher amount of similar types of responses, because people typically don't have much time for it. Plus it gets done countless times every week on here, so you get a tired response to a tired attempt at engaging conversation.

I simply pointed out the flaws in your thinking and gave a reasonable response as to why the card isn't a problem. If that's your idea of 'not being able to have a conversation' then it's more of an issue with you looking to either be pandered to or to find an echo chamber. Neither are my problem. Next time, make a more rounded, considered, non salty thread perhaps?

You didn't even bother to attempt a response to my actual response regarding the card. For someone bemoaning an ability to have a conversation, you aren't very good at engaging in them. 

 I will take the criticism of setting the wrong tone, since it's obvious to me that multiple people didn't get my intention. The reason I mentioned my anecdote and my saltiness was precisely to take the wind out of the sails of responses I anticipated that would be like "ah, you don't want to discuss, you're just salty because you lost to a card". Apparently by admitting to being salty I provoked what I was trying to avoid. I still thought I made clear that I don't think of the card as overpowered, just wanted to discuss the underlying mechanic. Probably a bad choice of words or whatever, my bad.

I still don't get your response though. What flaws in my thinking? I know that for every outcome as bad as the one I experienced there is a multitude of better outcomes. I'm a mathematician, I know statistics. I pointed out that likelihood as an anecdote, not to prove a point.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but as far as I understood your response, your point is: Mutanus is useless as often as useful, therefore balanced. But the direction of my question was a different one: Is the difference between a "good Mutanus" and a "bad Mutanus" too strong? As a reference, there could be a card that says: "Flip a coin. Heads, you win the game. Tails, you loose." Such a card would be perfectly balanced, but still terrible design. So I wanted to investigate whether Mutanus is too much like such a card or not.

And by the way, my remark about people not being able to have a decent conversation wasn't even so much aimed at you, but more to witty one-liners that put up no argument at all. When I wrote that, I was upset that there were multiple responses that didn't seem to even discuss the same topic I was referring to. But as I get from your answer, that might have at least partially been my fault, as people probably got my intention wrong.

p. s.: I realised just know that you had posted an answer in this thread previous to the one I initially quoted. I wasn't aware of that then. I agree with you on the skill cap thing and also that such cards with high skill cap (Mindrender Illucia comes to mind) are quite interesting. I'm not delusional about my ingame abilities (I consider myself a decent, but not good player) and I would honestly applaud someone sniping a wincon from my hand after correctly deducing that there's a high chance for that to happen.

Quote from D_Lord >>

Quote from Amaranthus >>

Quote from D_Lord >>

The problem is that you can't (or should I say shouldn't) create non-random hand disruption at a halfway competitive mana cost because that's even more of a problem. Just as an example, look at your last three scenarios and imagine Mutanus being a Discover ability. Yes, it's less random and thus less frustrating to play against, but that would have been a lot stronger because in two of your three scenarios, it's pretty likely that your highest cost minion gets rekt. Disruption is honestly fine at this power level and mana cost, and I am quite happy that it exists. There should be counterplay to more stuff.

 No objection to that. A Mutanus with a discover effect would be absolutely horrible design. Still, something like Dirty Rat is valueable counterplay with less variance. I for one would like that better, but I can see your point.

 I fail to see how DIrty Rat has less variance. It literally has the same chance of pulling a minion. Sure, if your opponent pulls a Rattlegore with their Dirty Rat and can't deal with it, that's awesome for you. But if they pull a Mozaki and clear it, it's literally the same thing (plus the card itself costs 5 less, so you can spend quite a lot of mana for the 2nd card and still remain efficient). In that sense, Dirty Rat has a much higher potential to f..k up the player who plays it, so the range of results is even bigger.

Regarding Reynad's video, it feels crazy to be reminded of how coinflip Knife Juggles were winning or losing games back in the day. If you think about it, it's not just about the likelihood of something happening, it's also about the consequences this has for the match. Did these 25, 20, 11% hits make you lose the game or did you even end up winning? Did you lose because of something else and was there a better way to play around Mutanus in the 25/20% games?

If you get frustrated by HS RNG, just remind yourself of what these likelihoods actually mean. I used to play poker a couple years ago and I can tell you that losing to 11-25% is absolutely likely compared to losing to runner/runner hands (hands where you are so far ahead that your opponent needs to hit two out of two cards; in my case, I lost quite a bit of money because I got rekt by players who hit their 2- and 1-out(s) on turn and river in a hand; happened to me 3 times within 2 weeks. Try not to freak out in such a situation). At some point, you have so many games that these unlikely scenarios will eventually happen; I also got a royal flush twice. Just accept that it happens and move on. It's a free(mium) game after all. It's not like you are playing the World Series of Poker, spent 10k to participate, and lose in your very first hand in a 99 to 1% situation.

Regarding your initial question, I remember people talking about how the mini set is weak and how Mutanus is way too slow because of aggro....blablabla. You can always argue one way or another, but the card really doesn't feel too strong or unhealthy for the game and the poll is pretty telling.

 Yeah, I was a bit unclear about that. What I meant with variance is that the impact of good or bad outcomes is heavier due to the fact that Mutanus absorbs the stats of the card and destroys the card (and is way understatted by itself, whereas Dirty Rat is overstatted). Dirty Rat just yoinks the card out of the owners hands, but the card remains in play and the stats don't switch sides. Most of the time, it provides less of a tempo (and value) swing and sticks to being combo disruption. Now, one could definitely argue that it's appropriate for Mutanus to have a heavier impact (be it for good or worse) due to the higher mana cost. The thing I wanted to discuss is whether it's good to have such high-impact combo disruption or if something cheaper with less tempo would be better for the game.

By the way, I play poker myself, so I have quite the experience with bad beat situations and usually can cope with them quite well. I will probably be able to laugh about the Mutanus story tomorrow. But I will still be interested in discussing the mechanic. Therefore I regret even bringing that anecdote up. It led people on the wrong track, I see that now.

Blizzard opened the flood gates of stupidity when they banned the first card in wild. Now for every strong card there will be someone wanting it banned while completely missing the point of banning. The only reason Stealer of Souls was banned instead of nerfed is so the card is preserved for Standard. And news flash: If Reno was anywhere close to needing a nerf...it would have been done a long time ago. Sorry that you cant win every game by going face brainlessly, but Reno isn't going anywhere.

KinkyJohn makes a good point that deserves a bit of attention . . .

There's "sometimes I get really nervous when I sit down to play a competitive game" and then there's

"every day or nearly every day of my life, anxiety hits me about relatively mundane things to the extent where I have serious emotional swings, trouble coping with every day stressors, and even at the extreme, suicidal ideation"

One is unfortunate.  One requires immediate attention by professionals.  Take that shit seriously.

Quote from nishinnis >>

Quote from Glax >>

So, actually Paladin not having nothing exceptionally strong, he struggles to stay in the meta (that's why he disappeared...)

 Are we.... are we playing the same game? I would honestly love to be playing the Hearthstone you're playing, because 7 out of every 10 matches I play are against Paladin. 

 I decided not to engage with that comment because it is:
a) Outright trolling

b) ..?

I can't comprehend this.

By the way, I want to thank everybody for keeping the discussion civil, honestly I was afraid that this thread would devolve to hunter nerf/tickatus nerf thread or something of that sort. Cheers!

Nerf everything, give us all 1/1 imps with a single 3/3 rabbit and it's a race to whomever gets the rabbit to stick first. Hero powers should be a neutral power that is shared across the board, I suggest 2 mana heal your target for 0, that shouldn't be too strong but it can be monitored and changed as needed.