Hearthpwn

In many parts of the world there are Significant costs to exceeding relatively low bandwidth units. Two gigabytes can be a big deal. 

Three reasons I prefer Hearthstone to traditional MTG (having not played Arena):

1) This

Quote from Blues >>

i love mtg and played it for almost 10 years (physical version), but sadly it does not translate well into virtual mode simply because you need prompts for every phase / instant answers and it gets slow and boring af...

 MTG can be great in person, but if playing against someone not really paying attention it can be very frustrating and that is far worse online because you can’t just smack or yell at the person. 

2) ThiS

Quote from xX_Clerk_Xx>>

i think hearthstone wins for the flavor, and liveliness of it. MTGA does not have that kind of flavor to it,

MTG doesn’t have great flavour. Most of it is pretty generic fantasy without the quirkiness and far more disjointed than Hearthstone. 

3) Lands and mulligan. While bad draws happen in hearthstone, they are far rarer and a big part of that is that you can’t end up drawing just lands or no lands and being completely helpless. A half decent deck and alright mulligans should give you early game plays virtually every game. The free mulligan is also really nice, especially for a more causal player that may not be as good at judging the value of cards with the large cost of an MTG mulligan  

Quote from JaegermeisterHs >>

I agree with some points, but  the sentence''We've been trying to change some of these power outliers over time, but only when making that change might also be positive for the live game environment''

This made me think. Because he confirms here that something in Hearthstone is sub-optimal. Which means that instead of fixing it all at once, Instead they wait when players are suffering even more from these ''power outliers'' than usual. This means that Hearthstones current long-term strategy is not the best for players. Nobody benefits from delaying solutions, when you have the opportunity to fix them by for example moving them to hall of fame.  slowly nerving and keeping the cards, we are already experiencing problems with for the last 5 years is really not something most people benefit from. 

 Not really. It is a question of long term vs short term. They are saying that while a nerf may have long term benefits, they only want to make the change when it is better in the current meta. Or the other way, they don’t want to make the game worse right now to make it better next year. 

All the players with minimal clections that go to play and find that their decksa are missing two cards. 

Cool card. I doubt it will be very good, but it is definitely neat with some tricks can you use it for (pseudo windfury or rush, triggering on attack buffs). And any hunter spell needs some consideration. But I just don’t think it is good enough for constructed (and can’t rely on having beasts in arena). 

It doesn’t seem so bad. Just bad. A card that is pretty much unplayable unless in combination with a legendary doesn’t seem like the best option. And your opponent is still at 6 mana (having the mana edge) while you still have to draw your minions before you can start to benefit. 

I really like this card and it’s effect, though. 

I don’t know if it will be top of the meta, I expect it won’t, but at some point in the next year or so someone will find a brutal combo with it and there will be mass calls for a nerf. 

It’s battlecry isn’t an enchantment. It’s battlecry adds enchantments to it. Just like if you played a fungalmancer next to an immortal prelate, the immortal prelate will keep its bonus stats as an enchantment. 

My question, can it have multiple immortal prelate battlecries go off? Can you have it shuffling five copies of itself into a deck?

Because the presentation of Hearthstone is pretty much entirely childish and cheesy?

Quote from lostkiwi >>

I am really surprised that Sonya Shadowdancer wasn't nerfed. Yes Giggling Inventor was strong in quest rogue, however combo's like Sonya and Vicious Scalehide or Stonetusk Boar are borderline broken, and I honestly feel that a quest rogue who draws those cards early, as well as Shadowstep, is near unbeatable.

I agree with the others that Giggling Inventor should be 6 mana. I'm not sure about Mana Wyrm, it seems to me the problem is more around the number of cheap spam spells along with Cosmic Anomaly was the more immediate problem, although I have no idea how that should be nerfed. I did think that the smorc  power of the mage needed to be addressed somehow though.

Spreading Plague is still busted though. If fact standard Druid in general (along with Quest Rogue) seemed like it was the class that needed addressing the most yet it got no attention. How many times do you see a druid play Plague on turn 6 along with an Arcane Tyrant?. Assuming you've got 4 minions on board then they get 32 worth of stats (as well as taunts) for just 6 mana.

 

 Giggling inventor is in standard for the next year while Sonia is gone in April. 

And while it was most broken in rogue, it was way too good elsewhere and an autoinclude in basically any deck not desperate for card slots. It would have been a very good and potentially broken card at six mana.