I think the answer is yes. I say that because for my season-end reward I got a golden Cold Blood when I only had one non-golden version of it (I dusted them after the nerf).
This means that they don't treat golden and non-golden differently for determining how many copies of a card you have.
Both the Hunter banner and the green color showing buffed stats is a different shade. I don't think it's my imagination. The green is lighter or more yellow. Has anyone else notice that?
It's fantastic. I continuously spend gold on all Standard packs, although I buy fewer packs of the old sets. I want to have as complete a complete as I can, within reason. This new system is incredible as now I don't have to wait forever to get that last rare and I'll no longer be wasting my gold on triplicate epics.
A lot of epics are "fun" cards that are only good for experimental decks. This new rule will be a boon for deckmakers.
I don't miss him, because the game has improved since he left. Maybe it's an unpopular opinion, but that's how I feel.
I don't know if he had anything to do with the management of the game, but after he left, they started to address a lot of the issues that had put the game in a rut.
I had multiple close calls, but I made it to 12 wins with this one. With only four dragons, I still managed to take advantage of lots of dragon synergy. Nether Breath was MVP. Lost one game to a Druid who discovered Ysera, Unleashed that proc'ed three dragons the following turn.
TERRIBLE rewards. Haven't felt this insulted in some time. A nefarious golden common reared its ugly head, and I got a Classic pack, perhaps what I needed least of all.
If I have other plays, I usually do not keep him in my opening hand. I do not think that Zephrys is best played as an active card in the early game. He is best played as a reactive card in the late game and secondarily as a finisher in the late game. I would only keep in the early game to use re-actively against a high tempo deck like Mech Paladin or if I truly had no other plays. Highlander decks should have other early game options besides Zephrys.
Just remember that a Turn 2 Zephrys is a board clear that you've lost. Animal Companion and Brightwing are unpredictable, and playing Wild Growth on Turn 3 is very situational.
I had a weird incident in which I was playing on my EU account and then I got disconnected even though my internet connection was working. It wouldn't allow me to reconnect to the game, and there was no message that I had lost my last game when I finally managed to reconnect. I don't think my stars changed after the disconnection, but after that I won my next two games but didn't earn stars.
I have a problem with calling arthropods "beasts". This online definition says the definition of beast is: an animal, especially a large or dangerous four-footed one.
I guess an insect is an animal, but as a native English-speaker, when I think "beast", I think of mammals, mainly. A wasp is not really a beast.
I've also been influenced by 3rd Edition D&D's differentiation between animals, vermin, and magical beasts as creature types. I think that non-vertebrate animals should have a "Vermin" tag (or something similar), and that only vertebrates should have the "Beast" tag.
One consequence of including arthropods and other non-vertebrates in the "Beast" tribe, is that the "Beast" tribe is too encompassing.
Hearthstone missed an opportunity to create a category that could link the Druid and Warlock classes together, as those classes would have the most "Vermin" cards.
Each of the play modes has a player-matching algorithm, but "officially" the algorithms are matching available players by RANK (Standard/Wild/Arena) or MMR (Casual), NOT by deck choice or class.
Hearthstone is not Call of Duty, and it does not have microtransactions as such. However, if they are doing it in one game, why not another?
It is in the company's interest to flatten out win rates as much as possible in order encourage players to spend more. It could be that they rate player's collection by spending and match low-spending players with high-spending players to reward the big spenders and frustrate the frugal ones.
However, there's just no proof that they are doing it in Hearthstone besides limited anecdotes.
I voted "yes". Twin Tyrant is always the correct choice. It's easy to get to turn 8 in this meta. You can never draft enough of them. It's a huge tempo swing, AND it's VERY hard to get rid of. It's like 7-cost Bonemare used to be.
1
It is now MUCH harder to get to Diamond 5 than it was to get to Rank 5 in the old system.
0
I think the answer is yes. I say that because for my season-end reward I got a golden Cold Blood when I only had one non-golden version of it (I dusted them after the nerf).
This means that they don't treat golden and non-golden differently for determining how many copies of a card you have.
3
Today, after playing for four-and-a-half years, I got my second Ancient Watcher as a reward on ladder.
Anybody else get a long-missing rare added to their collection because of the new system?
1
Both the Hunter banner and the green color showing buffed stats is a different shade. I don't think it's my imagination. The green is lighter or more yellow. Has anyone else notice that?
0
It's fantastic. I continuously spend gold on all Standard packs, although I buy fewer packs of the old sets. I want to have as complete a complete as I can, within reason. This new system is incredible as now I don't have to wait forever to get that last rare and I'll no longer be wasting my gold on triplicate epics.
A lot of epics are "fun" cards that are only good for experimental decks. This new rule will be a boon for deckmakers.
1
Technically, they are not duplicates, they are triplicates. You do want a duplicate epic; you don't want a triplicate epic.
5
I don't miss him, because the game has improved since he left. Maybe it's an unpopular opinion, but that's how I feel.
I don't know if he had anything to do with the management of the game, but after he left, they started to address a lot of the issues that had put the game in a rut.
0
I had multiple close calls, but I made it to 12 wins with this one. With only four dragons, I still managed to take advantage of lots of dragon synergy. Nether Breath was MVP. Lost one game to a Druid who discovered Ysera, Unleashed that proc'ed three dragons the following turn.
I went with all of HearthArena's choices with this one: https://www.heartharena.com/arena-run/21zg8f
TERRIBLE rewards. Haven't felt this insulted in some time. A nefarious golden common reared its ugly head, and I got a Classic pack, perhaps what I needed least of all.
0
If I have other plays, I usually do not keep him in my opening hand. I do not think that Zephrys is best played as an active card in the early game. He is best played as a reactive card in the late game and secondarily as a finisher in the late game. I would only keep in the early game to use re-actively against a high tempo deck like Mech Paladin or if I truly had no other plays. Highlander decks should have other early game options besides Zephrys.
Just remember that a Turn 2 Zephrys is a board clear that you've lost. Animal Companion and Brightwing are unpredictable, and playing Wild Growth on Turn 3 is very situational.
0
Very cute - well done!
0
I had a weird incident in which I was playing on my EU account and then I got disconnected even though my internet connection was working. It wouldn't allow me to reconnect to the game, and there was no message that I had lost my last game when I finally managed to reconnect. I don't think my stars changed after the disconnection, but after that I won my next two games but didn't earn stars.
1
I have a problem with calling arthropods "beasts". This online definition says the definition of beast is: an animal, especially a large or dangerous four-footed one.
I guess an insect is an animal, but as a native English-speaker, when I think "beast", I think of mammals, mainly. A wasp is not really a beast.
I've also been influenced by 3rd Edition D&D's differentiation between animals, vermin, and magical beasts as creature types. I think that non-vertebrate animals should have a "Vermin" tag (or something similar), and that only vertebrates should have the "Beast" tag.
One consequence of including arthropods and other non-vertebrates in the "Beast" tribe, is that the "Beast" tribe is too encompassing.
Hearthstone missed an opportunity to create a category that could link the Druid and Warlock classes together, as those classes would have the most "Vermin" cards.
0
Each of the play modes has a player-matching algorithm, but "officially" the algorithms are matching available players by RANK (Standard/Wild/Arena) or MMR (Casual), NOT by deck choice or class.
That being said, it is also well known that Activision has a patent for a matchmaking process that is meant to encourage microtransactions in Call of Duty. https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2017-10-18-activision-patented-method-of-tuning-matchmaking-to-boost-microtransactions
Hearthstone is not Call of Duty, and it does not have microtransactions as such. However, if they are doing it in one game, why not another?
It is in the company's interest to flatten out win rates as much as possible in order encourage players to spend more. It could be that they rate player's collection by spending and match low-spending players with high-spending players to reward the big spenders and frustrate the frugal ones.
However, there's just no proof that they are doing it in Hearthstone besides limited anecdotes.
0
It isn't fair. I just conceded on Turn 6 against a 7/6 Evasive Feywing, a 5/5 Oasis Surger, a 5/1 Oasis Surger, and a 7/5 Evasive Wyrm (with divine shield intact).
It makes Cubelock look fair and balanced.
I would say that I don't get it, but then again I do get that they want to sell their adventures.
0
I voted "yes". Twin Tyrant is always the correct choice. It's easy to get to turn 8 in this meta. You can never draft enough of them. It's a huge tempo swing, AND it's VERY hard to get rid of. It's like 7-cost Bonemare used to be.