Hearthpwn

Quote from arrumph >>

The OP's chef analogy is very telling. Of course somebody who aims to become a professional chef will study the ideas, techniques, and recipes of established masters. He's trying to learn a trade and get a job.

If you're an amateur cook, on the other hand, and you find a great recipe, and all your friends love it and agree that it's the best thing you, or any of them, has ever cooked, do you just cook that, and nothing else, for the rest of your life? Maybe you do! I sure wouldn't.

Hearthstone isn't a job. It's a game; it's supposed to be fun. If you never make your own decks, you're missing out on a major component of the fun (some would say the principal component—the thing that makes CCGs such a lively, entertaining genre), not to mention a huge portion of the content. It's true that rank-20 scrubs who don't netdeck are fooling themselves when they claim to be good players foiled by nefarious cheaters, but anybody who's never won with his own deck is fooling himself too—if all you can do is pilot a few streamlined aggro netdecks competently, you haven't yet scratched the surface of this game, regardless of what rank you've achieved.

I've reached legend many times, using netdecks as well as decks of my own invention. I understand why people use netdecks in ranked play (even as somebody who is, if I may flatter myself a little, pretty good at deckbuilding, I've generally found it easier to rank up with other people's tried and proven decks, or at least to use them as foundations for modified versions), and I don't blame them—players' preference for netdecks ultimately stems from poor design choices on Blizzard's part.

But just because I understand why people do it and don't blame them for it (and do it myself sometimes) doesn't mean I have to like it. It makes ranked play boring and predictable, and because it spoils players and stifles creativity, it spills over into (and effectively ruins) unranked play as well. It keeps 90 percent of the game's content out of play. And, yeah, it makes me pretty salty sometimes. When you so rarely have the opportunity to laugh at something you've never seen before or marvel at an opponent's ingenuity, and when you so often just have the same three FotM decks shoved down your throat over and over, it causes the social aspect of the game (which, though limited in Hearthstone by design, is crucial to any card game) to curdle.

Mysterious Challenger is a bit of a different situation to Warsong Commander because a new anti-Secret card release could slap it in the nads. Release a neutral low or midcost minion with the effect of Flare and bam, there goes the winrate.

You know, one of the interesting things about Hearthstone is that, despite being entirely digital and involving no trading between players, it actually takes way longer for problem cards to be nerfed than it takes for problem cards in physical games to be restricted or banned. You'd think it'd happen much more quickly than that. I might go as far as saying that the hands-off approach to the meta is strange.

The whole Undertaker situation had an appalling timeframe. Not sure why they thought that'd sort itself out.

Quote from Human_Guy >>

I just want to remind people of Evil Heckler.

Remember when people where defending this card at TGT release and how it doesnt matter at all that they dont buff basic cards ever?

Well now you got it. Here is the result of blizzards "we dont give a fuck" attitude against buffs and nerfs of cards. 
Hope you enjoy the crappy version of Warsong Commander, since you are now stuck with it until the end of eternity because they will never ever buff shitty cards, ever.

But maybe they rerelease the card in a future set.

It's important not to forget that releasing a stronger version of an existing card is actually different to buffing the old version, because it means that you can use the two cards together for a total of 4 copies. The same thing applies to releasing a crappier version of an existing card - it may still be desirable because it effectively allows the player to use more copies.

It's farfetched in the case of Heckler, but if Taunt minions with 5 attack and 4 health suddenly became extremely desirable because of some kind of interaction, then the end results of buffing the old card and releasing a new one become different.

It just seems too unreliable, and I can't help but feel that warriors can do something better with 6 mana, or just use the card slot in a much better way. It'd be more desirable if the effect was treated as a negative rather than a positive (which, given its unpredictability, it could be) and offset the cost. It's also not helped by the fact that the damage will often occur at the start of your own turn, which is the worst time; too soon to load up the board with cards that would benefit from it or play Warsong Commander, but too late to avoid summoning sickness for patrons.

In other words, if it cost 5 instead of 6, it'd immediately be way more appealing. Flame Leviathan 2.0.

I'm loving all of the "I can't netdeck to win, abloobloobloo" tears. Yeah, there's a strong element of chance, but it's definitely not a brainless slog, and I'd argue that a smart play involves a much higher amount of involvement and forethought in this kind of unpredictable environment than it does in normal play or most other brawls.