Hearthpwn

Quote from Kahgro »

 

Quote from irons182 »

The win streak helps better player to skip games early on and makes sure that the average hearthstone player doesn't have to deal with lot's off pro players.

The problem is that it's extremely easy to earn a winstreak even if you aren't better through probability. The game doesn't take win rate or how much better you are, it only takes a streak that can happen by random chance. Streaks aren't an accurate predictor of skill. 

It doesnt need to be 100% accurate.  As long as it's accurate-ish it's good enough. There is no good reason to have players like Trump stuck in rank 15-6 for the full suite of games. Remember a streak only gives you 1 extra star per game over 3... you need to win 6 games in a row to effectively "skip" a 3 star rank. If you're just kinda lucky and manage a streak it's not like you suddenly jump 5 ranks. Also, the ranking system is an estimator.  Playing in rank 6 does not mean you are a better player than people currently playing in rank 7 it means you're close.... being in Rank 6 typically will mean that you are a better player than someone playing in rank 12.

Quote from Brioz »

Quote from Zursa »

The same day that they announced GvG they stated:

No confirmed changes for Gadgetzan Auctioneer, yet. They know Spare Parts are 1 Mana Spells, it's a concern, they'll watch it.

clearly they came to the conclusion that there was potential decks that involved spare part synergy that were just too out of control. It would have been a repeat of the buzzard for hunter. Clearly they felt that instead of nuking miracle out of existence a 1 mana buff to auctioneer could slow it down just enough for it to still be balanced. Don't forget that Trade Prince Gallywix was announced and could be really good in miracle. They play tested all of this extensively, they know what they are doing. 

 

 

You seem to have much more faith in their balance team than I do. If they knew exactly what was going to happen with cards after release I doubt Undertaker would have passed in it's current iteration.

They don't know exactly what will happen because it's unreasonable to think they will try every possible combination and idea... but they can very easily find some of the ideas and identify if that idea is way to powerful.  For example I could easily see a miracle shaman burn deck with the new cards and some spare parts minions. Maybe it was way too powerful... We're not just adding spare parts but also lots of extra spells. I find it perfectly reasonable to believe that the balance team found 1 or more decks with auctioneer that were too powerful.  I also find it perfectly reasonable that with undertaker they assumed that people would hate it out if it got out of hand... it is a silence-able minion that takes multiple turns to grow.

Keep in mind with the Auctioneer it isn't only spare parts but the number of spells for each class is also growing by a large percentage. I imagine that they saw too much potential for other "miracle" decks (miracle burn Shaman?) and decided to preemptively blunt that possibility. 

Keep in mind this could also be created as a possible counter to Paladin or Warrior getting out of hand.  I get the feeling that the devs are trying to carefully weave in options to counter specific archetypes if they get out of hand.  If the new Paladin Weapon were to prove to be too strong. Or a new Warrior Archetype started becoming too popular this card would be a meta option.

Quote from Balckovic »

Quote from kaworu876 »

Quote from Balckovic »

Why do people always try to justify a rng card, because "it can hit stealth minions". So does Deadly Shot, but is it played....ever? nope. Because RNG sucks balls. 

I happily play Harrison Jones as a vanilla than this card.

Harrison Jones is a good card because it offers card advantage - you don't just kill a weapon, you draw cards and get a creature.  This card is potentially good for the same reason - card advantage.

It's also difficult comparing spells and creatures, particularly when discussing Rogue where a "spell" has greater utility because of cards like Preperation.

But if it's so good and offers such card advantage, then why does Deadly Shot never sees any play? Unless you play it just for the combo effect, and then it's a worse and more expensive Ooze, which isn't that great, too. In miracle, I don't know which card it should replace + it's situational and to "waste" a prep on a card, which doesn't cost 0 mana is not the brightest idea either...

Deadly Shot actually was played a lot before the Buzzard Nerf as another way for hunter to deal with Taunts (I think the rise of Sludge Belcher also helped push Deadly Shot out). I don't believe anyone is saying Deadly shot creates Card Advantage, but it can create tempo advantage. 

There are a lot of ways for Rogue to use this as a slightly cheaper Assassinate.  Rogue has a lot of removal to attempt to set this up for a big tempo play. 

Quote from Sonserf369 »

Quote from Redroyhs »

Quote from Sonserf369 »

I'm going to be honest. If this "50% chance" mechanic is to become evergreen, I'm worried about the future of the game.

That aside, this card is stupidly powerful if you can set up the right board state. Amazing stats and an upside with a small controllable drawback is pretty nice. Most likely too slow for constructed though.

Well, Ragnaros and Sylvanas are both have a random factor. However, this does not make them bad cards.

I didn't mean it in power level terms. I meant in terms of complexity and long term health of the game. Ragnaros is already an example of bad RNG where the outcome is very luck based. This new "50% chance" mechanic works on a similar vein and overall is not healthy nor fun most of the time. its just RNG for RNG's sake.

No.... Webspinner is RNG for RNG's sake... This is semi-RNG.  Yes there is a random element to it but you can easily control how good/bad the outcome will be.  It's no different than what you draw next turn being "rng" but by only putting cards in the deck that you want you get to control the rng to give you good cards. This kind of RNG creates more opportunity to inject skill into the game.

Quote from Granit »

Quote from TazdingoHS »

Quote from seriousity92 »

Coin...reduces mana cost of mountain giant. 

Um...no it doesn't.

Yes, it does. It is a card in your hand, so it lowers the cost of Mountain giant by one. Sure, if you cast the spell, it does nothing if you want to play your Mountain.

To Taz's point though if you have the coin it being a spell or some kind of +1 mana button would do exactly the same thing to the cost of Mountain Giant, it's just you would actually have to use it if it wasn't a spell/card instead of keeping it in hand.

It's either just you or you only play miracle rogue...  If I remember right last time the stats were posted every class other than rogue had a slightly better win percentage going first with rogue only being tipped a little bit the other way. 

To be fair that could be attributed to players in lower ranks not knowing how to properly use the coin, skewing the results but either way I don't think the difference in win percentage is enough to try to change it.

Quote from L3xx »

Control hunter is counter-intuitive to its hero power as its hero power doesnt help you with board control at all so the longer the game goes on the harder things  get...

Warrior's hero power also does not help with the board (other than with shield slam). It fits with the control theme by keeping you alive.

In a Hunter control deck you would focus more cards on control and rely more on your hero power to apply pressure and win the game. Naturally this will mean that Priest and Warrior will probably continue to be the best classes against a control Hunter but imagine a class like Rogue, Warlock or Shaman against a control hunter that has control of the game and is able to ping for 2 every turn. It could force those players to over commit into bad situations. 

Everyone needs to remember that new cards don't only go in current decks.  Does this fit in current face hunter builds? NO.

But it very well could fit in some kind of control/midrange hunter. Hunter does have a lot of removal options and as someone pointed out Hunter's mark + pyro is good removal and plays well with this card.  New cards need to be evaluated in terms of other cards/value not in terms of current decks and meta.

I could see it making it into new decks.  I have a feeling Blizzard is trying to help push midrange as an option in all classes. This guy seems to fit that style very well.

It's definitely going to be one of the stronger 2-drop options for mage in arena. 

Control hunter doesnt need an 8 cost minion... between Highmane and neutral legendaries I think you can put together a plenty good top end.  The problem is they have no good board clear effect to keep them going to the late game. Explosive trap isnt good enough for a control deck since it leaves behind so many deathrattles and so many minions have 3 health. Unleash faces the same issue... 

Quote from Spectre1116 »

I agree with the assessment that what makes stormforged so good is that it can be played on turn 2, as most of the popular 2 drops have 2 health.  3 drops tend to have 3 health or better, which means you likely won't get a clean kill with the weapon hit. I think you'll see opponents start to anticipate this play and trade their 2 drops with a Paladins 2 drop instead of attacking past to avoid the free trades at turn 3 once GvG comes out.  It will be a tempo changer for sure.

That being said, a zombie chow on turn 1 and coining out this weapon on turn 2 will probably mean victory in arena, and playing it late to buff a strong minion will also be super good. This will be a great arena pick.

Paladin can go first... in which case when you play this the biggest drop the opponent will have is a 2 drop (unless they coin).

I have a feeling some kind of aggro or midrange Paladin will be viable after this set is released. On 5 you could also drop this with Echoing Ooze for some extra value especially if you have an Avenge in play.

Quote from Mister_Smith »

Quote from BoobTheNoob »

He was stating in ''Alpha'' that the ratio between cards changed. There are more legendaries in the expansion then one might expect, and more epics too, also he didn't complain about that fact.

The second part you say they will keep 2 archetypes and maybe at one. Right after that you say it was bs that there will be 3 or 4 archetypes per class as stated by the OP. 2+1 =3 so you actually agree with him.  

I like the breakdown of the GvsG expansion. Hope to see it go that way ;)

I don't know where you come from but where I live this sentence: "The purpose and motivation is still blur and I can only assume, in sense of economy, this action will bring a more profitable revenue to the company as some marketing managers in activison probably had that figured out and calculated." is called a complaint. 

That is not a complaint.

"Pepsi is rolling out a new flavor to raise profits" is a statement of a fact not a complaint.  It's kind of a silly statement to make since virtually any move made by a for profit company is for profit but simply stating that a company is trying to make a profit is not a complaint.