I agree that Gnome Muncher is a strong card, but your calculations are wrong from the start. I have no clue what is your point with 6 Mana 5/6 being "normal", since the launch, there existed a 6 Mana 6/7 with no abilities, so it would be considered 'normal'. You could make an argument that a card with abilities should have lower stats, but then I have no idea why you brought Yeti as an example of 'normal' stats for 4 Mana. And both Yeti and Ogre have not seen play in years. I have no idea who would play Gnome Muncher at 8 Mana, if you would do a Mana nerf, I don't see it costing more than 7. At 8 it would be probably worse than card like Walking Fountain, which is not realy great.
Perfect meta: Floods of Aggro decks and games that end before turn 6. Alternatively, full control meta where every game is at least 15 turns, unless opponent concedes, because they're too weak to watch having their board wiped every turn, and while having to face endless Taunts and healing (works best with cards that shuffle cards into decks, so dying from fatigue takes long)
Nightmare Meta: Control decks that require strategy and thought to win, but end games within 15 turns. OTK decks (unless without options to disable / counter them) Finally, aggro if it doesn't have free draw, and can only keep less than 6 damage to face per turn on average
Edit: Made some changes
My personal preferences really must have bothered you, hey? lol Not sure why, though.
Perfect meta: Floods of Aggro decks and games that end before turn 6. Alternatively, full control meta where every game is at least 15 turns, unless opponent concedes, because they're too weak to watch having their board wiped every turn, and while having to face endless Taunts and healing (works best with cards that shuffle cards into decks, so dying from fatigue takes long)
Nightmare Meta: Control decks that require strategy and thought to win, but end games within 15 turns. OTK decks (unless without options to disable / counter them) Finally, aggro if it doesn't have free draw, and can only keep less than 6 damage to face per turn on average
I think that b) is most important for balanced game, because everyone can play their favourite gameplans, and also they will face a variety of types of decks, so even if they don't like playing against some types of decks (say, control, because it feels like waste of time when they play so long games), they will also face decks which they like fighting more, and knowing that, unfavoured opponents will be less frustrating.
However, because of how Hearthstone is structured and divided into classes, what leads many people to focus rather on playing certain classes rather than deck types, a) is also important, so people can play classes they want.
c) is imo not very important, because important differences between spell and minion focused decks are already conveyed by a).
His effect for sure was big, but at this point I think he's more than a regular card, he's a choice you have to do whenever you make a deck that will affect your gameplay depending what you want more. Baku/Genn were similar a bit, but not exactly, they were more of build around for powerful effect, unlike Renathal, you had to put them in their respective decks, and would never put them in decks not built with them in mind.
6
I like how all decks try to have fancy names, and then there's "Highlander Hunter"
0
"Battlecry: Your hero steals 10 Health from your hero."
7
How long can this go on...
0
Why though? Why do this brawl twice in a row?
1
I agree that Gnome Muncher is a strong card, but your calculations are wrong from the start. I have no clue what is your point with 6 Mana 5/6 being "normal", since the launch, there existed a 6 Mana 6/7 with no abilities, so it would be considered 'normal'. You could make an argument that a card with abilities should have lower stats, but then I have no idea why you brought Yeti as an example of 'normal' stats for 4 Mana. And both Yeti and Ogre have not seen play in years. I have no idea who would play Gnome Muncher at 8 Mana, if you would do a Mana nerf, I don't see it costing more than 7. At 8 it would be probably worse than card like Walking Fountain, which is not realy great.
5
No, because it no longer is considered taking damage
4
Damn, imagine getting banned in the only mode you're available
1
Wait, this is actualy real now after nerfs
1
I still can't forget how they announced Darkmoon Races day or few before release.
0
Nah, I just try to be funny too much
0
it's been better, but it still holds quite well, so yeah, I think it passed a test of time
0
Perfect meta: Floods of Aggro decks and games that end before turn 6. Alternatively, full control meta where every game is at least 15 turns, unless opponent concedes, because they're too weak to watch having their board wiped every turn, and while having to face endless Taunts and healing (works best with cards that shuffle cards into decks, so dying from fatigue takes long)
Nightmare Meta: Control decks that require strategy and thought to win, but end games within 15 turns. OTK decks (unless without options to disable / counter them) Finally, aggro if it doesn't have free draw, and can only keep less than 6 damage to face per turn on average
Edit: Made some changes
0
Charge is better than Ferocity tbh
0
I think that b) is most important for balanced game, because everyone can play their favourite gameplans, and also they will face a variety of types of decks, so even if they don't like playing against some types of decks (say, control, because it feels like waste of time when they play so long games), they will also face decks which they like fighting more, and knowing that, unfavoured opponents will be less frustrating.
However, because of how Hearthstone is structured and divided into classes, what leads many people to focus rather on playing certain classes rather than deck types, a) is also important, so people can play classes they want.
c) is imo not very important, because important differences between spell and minion focused decks are already conveyed by a).
2
I like Renathal, I hope he will still be viable.
His effect for sure was big, but at this point I think he's more than a regular card, he's a choice you have to do whenever you make a deck that will affect your gameplay depending what you want more. Baku/Genn were similar a bit, but not exactly, they were more of build around for powerful effect, unlike Renathal, you had to put them in their respective decks, and would never put them in decks not built with them in mind.