Hearthpwn

Battletag: Mystik#1407
Region: NA
Trade Only?: Yes, you go first

I mean, I wouldn't ban mage because I think she's broken or anything; I just find her annoying to play against.

I disagree with your numbers. Here's how I did the math, and you can let me know where I went wrong.

First, I'll do the math of getting none on the first draw. This is 28c3/30c3=.806 (more or less), as we choose three cards from the non-ideal pool, versus just drawing 3 cards from the entire pool.

Given that we didn't draw the card we wanted and mulliganed all the cards, since we don't draw with replacement, the new pool is only 27 cards. So, the chances of not drawing the card we want is 25c3/27c3=.76 (note c denotes choose)

So, the chance of not drawing any of the cards we want is .76*.806=.6344

the complement of this is .3655, which is the chance of getting at least one of the cards you want without the coin. With the coin (the calculations are identical), we get .468

Still, our numbers are close enough I suppose it doesn't really matter. 

He really wanted to be a librarian.

Whelp, I can't help but weigh in.

Firstly, I can't help but address Hitler. All I'll say is that the history books are written by the winners, and if Hitler had won WW2, I'm sure the majority of the population of American and Europe would consider him a good person (I reserve judgement on limited-involvement countries such as china). But this doesn't really matter.

So, on the topic of voting. I guess the goal is to ask ourselves what it means to have the best system. Is our goal to make the most enjoyable experience? Is our goal to make the most "fair" experience (in which everyone has an equal opportunity to win regardless of submission time)? 

I'll start with the second first. So, how unfair is the system right now? Let's go ahead and sample last week's competition. 

(I'll denote these x/y, where x is number of entries that progressed to finals, and y is number of pages with that many entries, so 0/2 means two pages had no entries advance).

0/2, 1/4, 2/3, 3/1. You might notice this totals to 13, not 16. Many entries were stored on hearthcards and are no longer available, so oh well.

Anyway, this is a reasonable distribution. We have some zeroes, we have mostly ones and twos, and a three. In other words, distribution by page is fair enough. Of course, distribution number on page is doubtless unfair, largely because some have been up longer than others, and I at least rarely bother to vote on the second-to-last page (so the last person on the page should be getting almost no votes). Fixing this wouldn't be hard. Just have a submission thread, and every ten submissions repost it to the voting thread. Then you don't have the huge card dump, but you still get a bit more fairness. Anyway, that's my quick fairness fix.

For increasing fun...that's hard. Personally, I've stopped caring enough to vote in the finals after I've made my submission, so I don't really care about them one way or another. But that is probably just me. I think it's cool to see people's ideas when I submit, and once I submit I'm done. So, I think the best idea would be to do something like HearthCards, which has the thingy which pops up people's cards randomly to review. Then you'd go into finals with the top few (it's safest to do finals for reasons I can elaborate if you request). So yeah, I'd do an external program (wouldn't take long to whip something up in java, but idk how to use html).

EDIT:So, on the topic of judges. I guess I'd just ask the old winners of the contest to judge for us. I'd also host an outside pool for them, so they could still sort of do the competition without being partial in the larger pool. I'd have each nominate one candidate for the finals, and have a couple "wildcard" spots in the finals which would be appointed by popular vote (we'd use highest non-nominated entry of course). Whether you could get the judges to do it is one thing, but I guess you'd have to ask them.

Let's see mill rogue some more.

Quote from Dr_Scaphandre >>

Alright I'm ditching the quest. I got a new idea. A Rogue spell that would make for great AoE.

That's really strong. Most spell deal on point of AoE damage per two mana crystals. This is about half the cost of any of those AoE, and has the added advantage of being forbidden.

So I'm not sure how many of these to summon. The basic idea is that you make this one desperate gamble, as there is no way to get those mana crystals back. You just have to pray that your 30 damage on the board will kill the enemy hero quickly. The effect of final guardians is to stop something like DOOM! or the like from destroying your board. Total AoE immunity.

I like it. Makes it a good tech card against aggro decks.

I've been playing the deck, and it has a few major weaknesses. First, it's win condition relies on it drawing two legendary cards. That is going to immediately delay you massively. In order to help compensate for this, I run a ton of card draw. Of course, that means that if the cards are at the bottom of the deck, I hit fatigue quickly and die. Finally, any aggro deck can tear it apart, as it's a control deck with the added burden of only running one of each card. It's fun to play, and when you get the combo off you feel like a god, but the percentage of games where you get the combo off is so small it's not OP.

Text: Battlecry: Take damage equal to the damage taken by your hero this game.

Personally, I've always favored a cheap aggro druid deck.

One thing that might help you is a knowledge of the ranked and rewards system. Basically, whenever you hit rank 20, 15, 10, 5 or legend, you get a large increase to your loot chest at the end of the season. Each individual rank gives you (I believe) only an extra 5 dust. In other words, pushing to rank 16 doesn't really matter much, but hitting rank 15 is a large landmark.

This might make you believe that you should be very careful, or even stop if you hit a rank divisible by five. However, this would be wrong for two reasons. Firstly, your loot is decided from your highest rank of the season, not your final rank. As such, if you should somehow hit legend rank, and then drop down to a low rank, you would still get a legend loot chest. So, losing games only loses you progress to better loot. It doesn't actually lose you any loot.

Finally, it's actually impossible to go from legend down to twenty. People used to do this, but now you can't fall below a rank divisible by five. So, if you hit rank 15, you'll never fall below it.

In other words, losing games will only lose you progress to the next rank, it won't make you lose anything you've amassed so far.

I hope this helps.