Hearthpwn

Quote from Prudence94 >>

Quote from ArchFrost >>

Gorillabot now has around 60% chance to discover another gorillabot. 

Being someone without something more interesting to do I checked, and as of now Gorillabot has 33.3% chance of discovering itself, since the only 3 Mechs available that aren't from GVG are Harvest Golem,Clockwork Knight and Gorillabot.... 

It just depends on what kind of decks you're running into. As is, it's probably best against mid range. If you face more aggro, swap out Sneed's Old Shredder for 2nd Sludge Belcher. If you face too much Secret Pally or Patron Warrior, a Harrison Jones in place of a Shade of Naxxramas would help. If too much Hunter/Mage, Kezan Mystic in place of Shade of Naxxramas. If you face too much control, the 2 Darnassus Aspirants could probably be Ancient of War.

Basically it's a solid deck and the only cards changed will be current meta or tech changes.

Quote from nurgling13 jump

Quote from Telefonkabel jump

Quote from nurgling13 jump

Quote from Telefonkabel jump

Quote from nurgling13 jump

Quote from Sinti jump

Quote from PookieJunk jump

Quote from Telefonkabel jump

With this card, you would know your next draw and get 3 copies of the same card by your next turn, am i right? i don't think that's intended... :-S
(cause you discard only one of the top two cards and draw none of them..)

I thought about how to word this when I was making it and realized there might be that confusion. Really you draw one card and put another copy of it in your hand but that wording was really clunky. My logic for why this wording was OK was because of Chromaggus. This says put "another copy" in your hand, not "a copy". The first card drawn isn't a copy but it is still referred to as a copy. So my card, drawing two copies doesn't mean they are both copies....hopefully that made sense, it made sense to me anyway.

haha lol ... when u write "two copies", it probably means TWO COPIES, not one card and one copy of the card :D that seems to be quite a fail :D

it should probably read something like this: "Battlecry: Look at the top two cards of your deck. Put one and copy of it into your hand and discard the other." :)

The way it's currently written definitely doesn't imply you would draw 3 cards, though. It doesn't say to put the card you choose plus two copies of it in your hand. It doesn't say anything about what you do with that card. If you really took the card literally, you might interpret it as putting that card back on top of your deck, but not putting three of it in your hand.

 

That's way i faulted that you would get 3 "by your next turn" ;-)
and surely the card would go back on top - cause you "look at the top two cards" and discard only the "other" one you don't copy.
Sinti's "Put one and copy of it into your hand and discard the other." would do it right, but i would prefer something short like "Draw two copies of one and discard the rest." - that would discard all but the 2 copies you've put in your hand.

This is all nitpicking, because it's pretty clear that it that it does what it's intended to do. You don't make things as clear as possible in Hearthstone text, you try to make it as concise as possible.

Of course, it's some kind of nitpicking for some, but for me clear wording is a really really important factor in a tcg - i hate the few original cards which you have to test before you know what they do, too...
Beside that, i like Wrathion (perhaps a bit too strong cause of choosing is a much better card draw than usually) - but i voted for outstanding&perfect(& mine of course :P) cards, not for nearly perfect ones ;)
And criticising an important/nitpicking factor should be expected in the finalist-discussion.

I feel like people say they want clear wording, but then when someone makes it unambiguous, it is too wordy and the text is too cramped and they don't even bother reading the card because of TL;DR. Concise with the meaning understood through implication is better card design IMO.

Exactly. I wish I would have used that last sentence hours ago, it might have ended the whole debate then. I realized that if you really wanted to, you could read my card 2 different ways. But why make the card text sound like crap just to get a point across that 99% of people understood anyway.

Quote from Kuko_2245 jump

Blizzard knows more about running multi-million dollar computer game business than 99.99% of community. That's why.

This. Maybe, MAYBE one day they'll do this for like 5 cards, and even those Blizzard would have the right to veto them if they turned the game in a different direction than they were planning anyway. But the smart money is on not a single card being created by anyone but Blizzard.... ever.

I'm sure there have been, and will be in the future, weeks where OTK shaman is top dog in Tavern Brawl. Even if it can't compete with Patron Warrior, Secret Pally, Combo Druid or Dragon Priest, it doesn't mean those decks will always be on top. To answer part of your question more, yes Healing Wave and Elemental Destruction are cards that improved the deck and made it MORE viable, just not viable enough. Who knows, maybe it's only a few cards away.

When you say viable, are you asking if it is competitive with other top tier decks or are you asking if you can play it and expect to take away a few wins here and there? Because if the former, no I don't believe OTK shaman can compete with most top tier decks.

Quote from vesperbot jump

Well, you get it to 1536, then you swap its HP and attack, and launch a Bouncing Blade vs a single Gahz'rilla for 80 hits (documented somewhere). Voila, a 2^79 damage minion.

PS: I'd like to see the screen darken when a minion is about to hit for 30+, just for the "OMG what a strike" effect.

If I remember right, buffing it's attack beyond a certain point (2 billion comes to mind) makes the attack reset to 0. Is that not still the case or is your 2^79 theoretical?

Quote from thepoxbox jump

It's cool except for the RNG of the cards, as usual.
Turn 1 jouster being 2/3 or 1/2 is literally the entire game.

Hardly. It's tough but recoverable, and "literally the entire game" is absurd. 

I have played 10 games, 6 as Annoy-o-tron and 4 as Boom bot. I've won 5 of my annoy-o-tron games but only 2 of my Boom Bot. I know this isn't a large enough sample size to say for sure but it certainly feels like if you are playing as controlling as possible and are Annoy-o-tron, you seem to have the advantage.

Quote from Jorge415 jump

Congratz on Wrathion man , you have my vote.

I appreciate it man but I'd rather not win this week, I already have the border and title. Of the likely winners I hope 1st place goes to either Rain of Arrows (for badass design) or to Doubling Pod (even if it is probably OP). I actually like my card for this week way more than last week so I almost wish I hadn't won before, just in case I get 1st this week. 

You're talking about ranking up to rank 5 THIS season right? Well you only have a few hours so if you don't have the dust to craft one, you should craft the one you can craft and bust out those games quickly.

Quote from Asylum_Rhapsody jump

Quote from PookieJunk jump

I saw SO many duplicate cards and SO many duplicate effects this week, I am genuinely surprised that that there are no double-ups in the finals.

Haha, well we do have two Presence of Mind cards with the same art, so there's that. I would have disqualified the one submitted second for plagiarism, but I looked it up, and that's the card art for the Presence of Mind card in the WoW TCG, so they really just drew from the source for inspiration.

Whoops you're right, I stand corrected. I think I was looking for two cards with the same art OR extremely similar text. These are so close I probably thought I was reading the same card.

Quote from Telefonkabel jump

With this card, you would know your next draw and get 3 copies of the same card by your next turn, am i right? i don't think that's intended... :-S
(cause you discard only one of the top two cards and draw none of them..)

I thought about how to word this when I was making it and realized there might be that confusion. Really you draw one card and put another copy of it in your hand but that wording was really clunky. My logic for why this wording was OK was because of Chromaggus. This says put "another copy" in your hand, not "a copy". The first card drawn isn't a copy but it is still referred to as a copy. So my card, drawing two copies doesn't mean they are both copies....hopefully that made sense, it made sense to me anyway.

I saw SO many duplicate cards and SO many duplicate effects this week, I am genuinely surprised that that there are no double-ups in the finals.

Quote from Teologic jump

Alright so I made my first entry this week, at first just something a bit rushed but the idea grew on me. Obviously it needs some balancing, would love to hear some thoughts!

It's entrance sound could be something along the lines of ''Let's make a deal...'' (if that isn't said by another card already? Can't remember). Upon death maybe ''The bargain is over!'', not sure about the rest.

Cool design with a powerful effect (maybe too much so). I picture this being absolutely insanely OP in zoo type decks, mech shaman/mage, aggro mage, face hunter etc. I'm just picturing the nightmare of playing this late game with 1 other card in hand, and just playing 3-4 low cost cards drawn from your deck. I'd imagine in that case, the Deathrattle will discard only 1 card, leaving you with a 3 mana 2/6 (OP) and multiple cards drawn. Plus the way it is worded, enemy cards will draw you cards right? So unless you have a full hand, and they have a lot of low cost cards to overdraw you, this seems to be a good thing more often than not. Probably should be a 2/4 or something but hard to tell without testing.

Also super petty feedback: With the exception of Blingtron, every legendary card is a unique character in Warcraft. To fit the theme of Hearthstone, this effect would probably be best on some specific ghoul/shadow/spirit character, assuming you wanted to keep the same theme as you have here.