Hearthpwn

That's good, I've used this deck to reach Rank 5 the previous 2 months. This month I got stuck with it around Rank 8-9, so crafted Aggro druid instead to get to Rank 5.

This is really good. I kinda got stuck around Rank 9 with my own Aggro Druid deck (with 1 Living Mana), spent 80 dust on this one, and went 24-13 to Rank 5. Well worth it, thank you!

This is the same as sonecaroxx's deck from a few months ago: http://www.hearthpwn.com/decks/939638-free-to-play-rank-23-to-legend-in-3-days-day-80

Good to see it is still holding up.

Wow this is not bad, definitely can give Warlock more time to control the board.

Proof of Rank 5: http://imgur.com/tbeTO83

Quote from Mackie264 >>

you are trying to tell me than in just one month of playing you discovered the secret to just climb like crazy? You basically skipped the whole learning curve of the game (which for sure can't be learned in a month)

Well, there's no actual secret to climbing like crazy, the information is out there in lots of videos, articles, I just had to go out and use it. I have friends who told me that it was hard for any new player, and the learning curve was quite punishing, but I was expecting it. Plus my first month was kinda learning the game with my tempo mage deck, and got to Rank 16. Doesn't mean I suddenly know all the decks and details, but learning the fundamentals seems to be important here. Trump Teachings video series especially helped me beat Legendary decks with Basic cards.

even PRO players that are recognized as the best of the world I don't think reached rank 5 in a month just by grinding it out every day.

Satoshi, reached Legend on a BRAND NEW account in just 17 hours using Token (Aggro) Druid. https://www.reddit.com/r/hearthstone/comments/6wadf6/3104satoshi_hits_legend_with_f2p_account_in_17/ 

Disguised Toast's run using F2P Hunter during the Un'goro meta seems to be quite well known as well. It is these examples, plus some people on battle.net forums saying they reached Rank 5 with only a few months play, that I knew I could do it. And why not?

And sure you hit rank 5 as a new player that's probably playing a subpar hunter list, on a meta that is so hostile to hunter rn with razakus priest stomping on hunter, with evolve shaman getting pretty much an auto win against evey hunter, with jade druid out valuing every hunter turn after like turn 5, with the small taunt warrior rise, with the immense amount of tempo rogues in the ladder that do the same thing hunter does but just a lot better and a lot more decks.

Yes, perhaps my hunter deck wasn't the best up to Rank 13, but I had most of the key cards like Savannah Highmane, Alleycat + Razormaw. And no, Hunter seems to be in a much better place than before the nerfs, I didn't even know it was Tier 1 according to TempoStorm until today. Yes Evolve Shaman was frustrating to play against, lost most of those games but won some :). Jade druid I knew I had to go face almost all the time. In Ranks 9-5 I started facing a bunch of Keleseth Rogues, some of which I couldn't do anything about, but there were many other players I faced that let me easily take control of the game.

Probably your phone is not working and you meant to write 15 instead of 5 :)

Oh, of course it did :).

Hearthstone has me curious with how most people play the game. Are a lot of people stuck at lower ranks after more than 200 games or do most people just play casual to Rank 20/15 for the rewards? It seems to be a mix, and why Rank 20 is full of netdecks like Pirate Warrior.

I saw the reply I got as quite negative, and so didn't bother to reply. I WAS being realistic and definitely believed I could hit Rank 10, and 5 would be possible if I kept playing.

Well, after the nerfs hit I started working on my Mid-Range Hunter deck. I'd create a version, go on a win streak, then when I started to lose a few, upgrade a few cards. At the same time I was making sure in every game, I was expanding my familiarity of the main aoe spells, minions etc of each class. Though I found that establishing the right balance between board control and going face was a far more consistent indicator of whether I'd win or lose games. 

I've hit Rank 5 now, and on the way, I'd play against Hunters and win against almost all of them. I'd see them making inefficient plays, going for face, when I could just make value trades with their minions. So I did have to craft a bunch of cards, namely, having 2x Eaglehorn Bow was essential for those times I needed that extra board control.

From what it seems, you were saying having a bigger collection = better rank, and that I'd get stuck at a lower rank until I got a bigger collection. Rather I think it is knowledge of the cards from those who do have bigger collections that helped me, I don't need to own the cards to know what they do.

Solid deck, I upgraded the Hunter deck I had, using this as a guide. Got to rank 5 with a very similar deck, just -1 Golakka Crawler for +1 Dire Wolf Alpha, and -1 Bearshark for +1 Tundra Rhino.

Around 66% winrate for me from Rank 13 to 5

Hi,

I've been playing Hearthstone for a month, and I've reached a point where I feel I need some help to get further in the game. I built this mage deck, and peaked at Rank 16 with it, however I found that I had to play almost perfectly to win or take initiative.

I'm now thinking I can probably upgrade this deck to a secret tempo mage, but it requires Karazhan cards which I don't have, so instead I thought of crafting either aggro druid or F2P Hunter. I'd ideally want to get to rank 10, maybe 5 this month, but perhaps that requires me to disenchant too many cards just to get 1 deck that might not be effective after patch 9.1 comes out.

If having to buy Karazhan becomes a pay-wall to improving my mage deck, I'd be willing to switch to Hunter/Druid, but I'd be having to start again learning a new deck I guess.

I'd also want to get better at arena so perhaps I can more easily build up my collection.

So TL;DR: If I want to get to at least Rank 10 this month, what should I focus on? Improving my most experienced mage deck, crafting and learning a new meta deck, or getting better at the game to do arena more?

Meanwhile the high IQ gamers are excited to see all the remaining Commons, Rares and Epics that will actually shape the game for the foreseeable months. 

Quote from Lxk >>

Most warlock specialists ( myself included ) prefer playing a control warlock variant over zoolock.

The fact that team5 pushes for zoolock while control warlock gets less appreciation is the problem.

 "I personally prefer X deck type. Team5 is supporting Y deck type, and because I don't prefer it, it's obviously problematic"

Considering hall of famed cards i got around 3k gols and 10k dust. I wont be disenchanting wild cards cuz i play wild mode. I will get the preorders when i see more cards.

Hello everyone.

I was thinking a bit about the future of Hearthstone and although it is still a bit early, with the next expansion being 4 months away, I think it is an interesting topic to discuss. I want to give you some of my own thoughts on what I think could or should happen, and I'd like to hear some opinions on what you guys think can or should change with the next year of Hearthstone. Please excuse the following wall of text. If you just want to make some predictions on what you think is going to change, feel free to skip it.

1. One of the things I expect (and really hope) most to happen is Wild content being reintroduced to the in-game store, allowing purchases of Wild sets with gold. There are many things that suggest this. First of all, as Ben Brode (and maybe other designers) has stated multiple times in the past year, the team would like to see players showing more interest in the Wild format, since the focus on Standard is more likely to cause some fatigue between expansions. Despite this, there was pretty much no support whatsoever for the format. To some extend, the game even discourages players from setting into the wild. New players are not made aware that the format exists for roughly a month of playing. Just to see older cards in the collection manager, you have to first hit the crafting button and then select older sets with that little (unmarked) button in the bottom left corner. And if you consider crafting an older card, the game even gives you a warning that it's not part of Standard anymore. Add to this, that Wild sets have been banned from Arena (probably a good move but not helping the format) and, as of late, are oftentimes not allowed/don't appear anymore in Tavern Brawl. Out of sight, out of mind, it seems. And older sets sort of being behind a paywall right now probably discourages most players from even giving it a try. It's no surprise that many players play wild just with standard decks, making the format rather "tame". If there really is an interest on the developer's side to make the format relevant again, the first step should be to make the cards more available than right now and actually give players the impression that the format matters to the developers. One of my favorite examples is that the nerf of Dreadsteed happend without an in-game notification. If you didn't know that Dreadsteed got nerfed, the game would not have told you so. That and the (in my opinion) rather ugly setup for wild with the brown paper in the collection and the tandrils everywhere really gives players the feeling of Wild as a dumpster. And irioncially, the so called "Hall of Fame" suggests that even more, with cards literally getting disposed from Standard. 

Another reason why it should happen with the next rotation is that the in-game store right now features an Adventure-button, which only contains One Night in Karazhan. And as we know, Team 5 now rather includes sinlge player content with expansions and gave up the strategy of releasing low impact adventures. In other words, the button is going to be obsolete next year with no plans to revive it. At least "some" change of the interface HAS to happen. And I think with the considerations mentioned before, the most logical step would be to make this button the "Wild"-button, giving old content a seperate section in the store.

2. A rather artificial problem (explaining why it's artificial would be a different topic) that the developers continuously complain about is the relevance of Classic and Basic in Standard and the circumstance that new cards oftentimes don't have the impact on the constructed scene the developers would hope for. There are different ways to respond to that problem, but I think what is most likely to happen is that we will see another large chunk of Classic and Basic cards nerfed or added to the Hall of Fame. Not too long ago, Ben Brode argued on Reddit that the average Standard deck (or any deck really) should not contain more than 10 cards from the core set. But when you look at some classes, that is almost not possible. With Druid, they already enforced this rule by nerfing almost every class card in the Classic set that was not on the weak side to begin with (and I strongly expect Nourish to get hit as well), also forcing a reinvention of the class with every new expansion. Hunter, on the other hand, is a prime example of how to make such drastic nerfs necessary. The class has had one failed expansion after another, and aside from some odd novelties such as Secret Hunter in Karazhan, the Yogg-and-Load that some people tried and the (maybe successfull) invention of the Spell Hunter, all new Hunter cards are measured as "does it fit into Midrange Hunter?". That deck is one of the few archetypes remaining from the old days, about the only Hunter archetpye that has always more or less worked, and the decklist shows with cards like Savannah Highmane, Kill Command, Houndmaster, Animal Companion, Unleash the Hounds [/card] and some others being essential to the deck. Even worse, some new cards have further strengthened that archetype, like [card]Alleycat, Crackling Razormaw or Bearshark, which is why most Hunter players continued to play that same old deck with some little additions here and there. Other classes that heavily rely on their core set are Priest, Mage and to a lesser extend Rogue. In addition, many archetpyes only work because of the core set. There is no Control Paladin without Equality and Consecration, there is no Token/board-focused Shaman without Flametongue Totem and Bloodlust, and almost every Mage deck is either tempo-oriented with Mana Wyrm and Sorcerer's Apprentice being the baseline, or is build around Ice Block in one way or another for a control-ish type. I feel that Team 5 is not too happy about the core set actually being the core of some classes. So I assume that for "design space"-reasons, some of these cards will be removed at least from Standard.

3. In addition to the last point, I think we will also see yet another change in the release schedule. I think the developers are generally pretty happy with how the Year of the Mammoth has been going. And I have to agree, three full expansions per year really help to spice things up. But on the other hand, and I think many will agree with me, it's still not quite enough. The metagame is usually set about a month after the release of a new expansion, and in the 3rd and 4th month of a meta, it really starts getting painful to see the same decks over and over and over again. I think the game would be better off with content being added a bit more frequently, maybe every 2 or 3 months, and I think the developers would like to see these big changes happening more frequently as well. Question is, if they even have the resources to pull that off.

4. While it sounds a bit contradictory to what I said earlier, I think this year has shown more than any other, that the game can easily get stuck if there are too many cards in Standard. Many of the new ideas implemented in JTU, KFT and KnC got overshadowed by ONK and MSG, or worked a little too well with the older cards. So, I think in addition to releasing content more frequently, Blizzard might consider to make the Standard cycles shorter. I think the quality of new cards on average shows that the designers really want to avoid a second happening of TGT. They want to make strong cards that will have a large impact on the meta. But when every expansion is on that power level, it is more likely to happen that decks can get out of hand, as it happend with Jade Druid in KFT and might be happening with Priest or Rogue right now. This wasn't even the first time it happened, but the nerfs happen much sooner nowadays than they used to. On the one hand, that is a good thing, on the other, it shows that many things turn out stronger than the developers apparantly can anticipate, and it can easily cause a lot of frustration right after the launch of an expansion. And that actually should be the best time to enjoy Hearthstone. So, maybe they will consider to let a set expire on the 3rd or 4th expansion following it, so that each new set stays for roughly 12 months in Standard.

5. A topic that somehow was always talked about but never tackled is the ladder for Ranked play, and several developers have already said they are not happy with it and are totally working on something right now. I think, next year we can expect a change of the ladder in some way, although I wonder if the change will be substantial enough. The main issue for most players is the grinding aspect of it, and I think that will be targeted by changing the "reset" of a new season, maybe setting players back only 5 ranks or giving them more bonus stars. What I think will NOT be targetted despite being a problem is the structure of the ladder. As Blizzard has oftentimes stated, more than 50% of all players are lower than rank 19 (iirc), and only about 20% of all players are at rank 15 or higher. Also, the ranks 25-21 can be considered the "new player zone", with most serious players never seeing these ranks at all. Even players who only rank up to 20 every season will start again on 23, if I'm not mistaken. To put it into perspective, we have about 4 ranks for new players and less serious players, 2-4 ranks for normal/casual players, and 15 for those who play more seriously. And while most people claim that the competitive scene really just starts at rank 5 or even later, it is a common issue for many players that netdecking starts as early as rank 19 or 18. Given how many cards per expansion are not even intended to be competitive and how much the developers want to emphasize the crazy and fun and weird aspects of Hearthstone, it doesn not really work that way if two, maybe three ranks out of 25 are a good playground for that. And as many others will likely confirm me, Casual is NOT the answer to that. Depending on how well you have been doing, there is virtually no difference between the decks you encounter in Casual and in Ranked. If the developers want a place for these "fun" decks and cards to see play, it shouldn't be just between rank 20 and 19 with the chance of still commonly facing the latest incarnation of Tempo Mage or Miracle Rogue. If Ranked is only meant to be for the most competitive players, it needs to be advertised differently and should be changed drastically. There is no point in establishing "new player ranks" and "little rewards to help your collection", giving them a place where they can only compete for at most 10 wins, if they ultimately are supposed to get stomped as soon as they get to 20. And for the serious scene, I doubt that you need 15 ranks with I don't know how many stars required to slow down your progress.

6. Finally, again continuing something I mentioned just a paragraph ago, the new player experience needs help, and I admit upfront I will get a little bit emotional here. This also was aknowledged by the developers, so we can expect "something" to happen, but given the latest endeavours, I'm not very optimistic on that. Or lets say, there have been improvements, and they were good ones, but they don't come close to solving the multitude of issues that have piled up over the years and I don't think we will get a good solution offered anytime soon. My hope is at least another small step comung up soon. 

I think it is good that they got rid of duplicate legendaries and a guaranteed orange gem appearing in the first 10 packs of an unpurchased set. Still leaves you with the problem that one player can open an unconditionally good legendary like Sunkeeper Tarim, while another one gets a high requirement legendary like Krul the Unshackled or a straight up bad one like Millhouse Manastorm. I think it's worth pointing out here that more recent legendaries are designed to synergize with other legendaries and epics, such as Rhok'delar and To my side. Then again, since JTU, the quality of Commons in new expansions has increased a lot, and although decks on average got more expensive, budget decks leaning into the zoo/mid-agressive direction can still be somewhat successful. However, as already mentioned, ranked is not made for new players. They can have a good time for maybe 10 or 15 games, but when they get to 20 or 19, or maybe make it to 16, they will eventually get stomped hard. The whole "budget" thing is just not a thing anymore on ranked. Most players will disenchant their entire collection to make one, maybe two working decks and grind them at nauseum, killing the diversity and punishing those who like to keep their cards. Effectively, new players have to get themselves a good deck quickly, or they get eaten alive. Not much of a joyful journey of exploration left, is there?

I don't think bad cards or even the luck aspect of pack opening is the main issue that forces players into netdecking and trading a big collection for just one 10k dust deck. I think, it's more the reward system as a whole and the ratio of dust gained/needed. Getting a legendary in 10 packs is great, grinding with basics for 2 weeks to get 10 packs isn't. And you don't do this for one set like people could do during Beta and Vanilla, you do this for 6, and that's just Standard. I know, some people will say that Wild is only for veterans anyway, but come on, why make it a no go area for the increasing populace of the game, when you can easily change it? Anyway, the reward system with daily quests awarding about 50 gold, the 3 wins bonus and the occasional arena run worked really well when there was only one set to buy and the next expansions being a relatively cheap Adventures. Nowadays, we have at mininum Classic + 4 big expansions in Standard, and the next big 135 card expansion always on the horizon. The outlook of grinding for well over a month at low odds of success or spending about 100 $ upfront is unlikely to get new players hooked and invested into the game. I know this is a tricky topic, since there are many players that, for some reason, don't want the system to get cheaper, coming up with lines like "I've been playing since beta and I never spent a single cent and I have all legendaries and hit legend every month" or "just go infinite in arena and you'll have all the cards in just a few months". While these uhm... "arguments" might fit the whole F2P debate somewhat (although not really), it does not contribute to the problems new players are facing right now. Less than one pack per day, requiring extensive grinding and/or doing really well in arena for a minimum effort of about 2 hours per day, every day for over a month, just to get started, is NOT friendly to new players. And like it or not, the whole F2P model that Hearthstone embraces is specifically meant to attract as many players as possible and then get them to spent money when they like the game (although most other good F2P games don't want to create an absolute necessity to spend money at all, going for an "ethical" approach where money is mostly spent on cosmetics). I doubt that the game right now is in a state where it can be enjoyed without spending money upfront and having no experience whatsoever. Or lets say, the enjoyment dies down rather quickly.

Another issue that the developers have successfully ignored for years is the really worthelss tutorial and the fact that even the Innkeeper decks were never updated at all. Even his "expert" decks feature such nerf victims as Starving Buzzard, Warsong Commander and Keeper of the Grove. Truly, I've mastered the game, for I have beaten the Expert Innkeeper and his overnerfed trash cards that nobody dared playing in years. The tutorial and the Innkeeper are supposed to get new players into the game, letting them learn the mechanics, the cards and refine their skills to a point they feel confident in taking on real players. In reality, these modes are helplessly outdated and new players might indeed learn the basic mechanics, but only to find out that about every single card they encounter in Play mode has 2 keywords they never heard of, huge battlecries, or just the word "random" slapped on it without note what this "random" even means. An experienced player knows and fears, that a Firelands Portal can spit out a Doomguard, and what cards are generated by The Lich King. They know that a mage secret without obvious triggers is likely Iceblock and they need to be fast or lose the game inevitably. A new player doesn't and is likely not enjoying the experience.

Also, the starting decks have always been weak and were meant to be refined, even with just basic cards, by new players. It was supposed to be a part of the learning experience and introduce them to the fun of deck building. However, the quality of the Basic set has been drastically lowered over the years with more changes to be expected. Not only are the starter decks a joke, and plenty of the good basic cards nerfed into oblivion, the decks you can make with basic cards are a joke in comparison to even the cheapest decks one could make these days. It's not just that Boulderfist Ogre got powercreeped like 5 times already, it's that the game's pace has changed so much that you are likely dead before you even get to play the ogre. And while some might claim otherwise, that has not always been the case. As I said earlier, it's good that common cards got more powerful. Players will eventually open a lot of commons and it's a good thing that even the "pack fillers" can help them to make their decks more powerful and interesting. But at the same time, I think it is a bit alarming how much the powerlevel of the game has gone up. When Standard launched, the developers argued that one of the reasons for the new format was to avoid powercreeping. They didn't want to be forced to make new cards much better than old time favorites like Sludge Belcher and Piloted Shredder. Well, I think we are a bit beyond that now, aren't we? The supposed "balance", the well maintained power level of Standard, is completely out the window by now. That also makes the game a bit more interesting, sure, but it creates and even fiercer environment for new players to set foot in; something that the developers were specifically trying to avoid, when they opted for Standard. Oops?!

The super minimalistic interface of the game also doesn't help. Quite literally in fact, as it does not even provide a help button or an info section on what was recently changed or what to expect in the upcoming months. Sure, this is not a big issue for those players who are in touch with the community and the developers, visiting sites like this one almost every day. But if you would sell Hearthstone as a standalone product right now, it really lacks some polishment. I am not saying that every other game does it way better, but if you truly care for new players, you do have to go the extra mile to help them get started and find out about everything. And I think Hearthstone has a few more miles to walk, since it has been standing still for the last couple years in that department.

It's just that I really want to see the game get better. As much crap as you can legitimately give Blizzard, I really want them to succeed. Hearthstone can be a great and fun game, and I wish for more people to enjoy it. But it is all these problems that just give me a bad feeling. I have been a new player, I was in that position where I got really intimidated by one of my first opponents in constructed playing Doctor Boom and Muster for Battle. And on other accounts, I do see the lower ranks and can still have some of that new player experience, and at times, it is outright soulcrushing. You struggle with cheap and basic cards, you try to complete the "play 10 cards that cost 8 or more" quest, when your best bet is Ironbark Protector. And then, for completely unrelated reasons, the developers think that Innervate is problematic and should get nerfed. It just pushes a button for me, how they not only solve some issues, but make others even worse. So... I'm sorry for the rant at the end, but I'm just passionate about the game. And I hope, at least some of these things are considered by the people in charge.

Well, that's all from me for now. Congratulations and my thanks to those few who made it to the end of reading all this, and I'm curious about your thoughts regarding the new year and the future of Hearthstone! :)

Quote from Lightspoon >>

I've seen some really interesting and intelligent suggestions that will make Wild more played, but remember that Blizzard doesn't want people to play Wild since they need that the majority of players stay sticked to Standard in order to make them buy new packs. Any kind of reward or help that could drive away a player from Standard is not a thing for Team 5.

I find it a bit sad, but this is how Blizzard manage its business for HS.

 What difference would it make for Blizzard if people would buy new or old packs? Nevermind, why would Blizzard not want people to buy new AND old packs?

Treating Wild as poorly as they did so far, actively discouraging people to try out the format and hindering them at obtaining content from older sets, they are most likely hurting themselves.

Even if you said that Wild players care less about new expansions (simply not true), there are plenty of ways to get people invested in both formats. But for that, you have to make both formats attractive. The way it is now, almost the entire game focuses on Standard: Tournaments, Arena, most Tavern Brawls, most balance patches and most if not all dev interviews. Not only is Wild content behind a paywall and locked for new players, it isn't even discussed or brought to attention aside from two or three Wild-related events (like a Heroic Tavern Brawl) in over two years. Make the format interesting, get people invested in it, and you will have people spend money on Wild in addition to Standard.

If you get people to spend more money on your product, the better it is for you. When Blizzard does not want players to get into old content, they are missing out on the opportunity to get people to spend more money. Not a smart strategy. And I have yet to hear a single good argument, business or gameplay motivated, that justifies this. It just makes the game worse, on every possible end.

We've got a balanced meta right now, but not based on good card design, it's based on high-rolls. It's the easiest way for blizzard to balance this game, it allows them to chase statistics very easily "Look, nearly 50% winrate, that's balance"....bollocks. Of course there is 'technical balance' if the decks going head to head are either going to mulligan for raza or keleseth, and win or lose based on that. I'll take it over endless pirate warriors, but this meta is long way from perfect. I think needs to revisit their card design from Old Gods and think about why that set was so good. Bouncing from discover RNG to high-rolls based on card draw isn't the answer at all.

I think I have 'The rank 5' syndrome. I play quite a lot until I reach rank 5 and then I more or less stop playing and just start doing daily quests. I've try harded (to some degree) to hit legend twice and I reached rank 2 and rank 1 5 stars. Hats off to those people who has the patience.  

As long as the game stays fairly playable as F2P, i don't care if they make thousands dollars bundles, and i see no reason to complain.

I just hope the extra resources are used for smart design to support new players experience.

This card has amazing synergy with magma rager!