Hearthpwn

There's still a way to make OTK work.

You just need 1-3 Horsemen in hand (Brewmaster or Zola the Gorgon), 0-2 Horsemen in deck (Baleful Banker) and possibly Call to Arms. Witchwood Piper could also be useful to either pull Bankers or the Horsemen themselves. Unfortunately Blackwald Pixie is only useful if one Horseman is Zola'd and another is in hand (either Brew'd or Banked+Piped).

HearthPwn community consensus prediction success rate is all the proof you'll ever need that democracy is a terrible way to make decisions.

Because the art has been publicly available for a long time (I've submitted fan-created cards with that art), the art doesnt match the effect very well, and the wording on the card seems a little awkward, my guess is that Ek0p is trying to make some April fools.

Edit: Actually, ek0p's video is an even more obvious April Fool's joke.

"Lord Godfrey isn't good because it's costs 7 and that makes it difficult to set up."

Kobold Librarian isn't exactly a tough set-up. If they release any more decent 1s with 2 or less Health (like Mistress of Mixtures that's rotating out), Godfrey becomes that much stronger.

Play with Bloodreaver Guldan and Emperor Tharussian in Wild to get a turn of dealing 12 and healing 48.

The way I look at this card is that it's roughly equivalent to a spell with "Destroy a minion that is 3/4 or smaller. Summon a 6/3 minion." That's not bad at all for 5 Mana; it compares favorably with Flanking Strike and Fire Elemental, unless there's lots of 4/3s or Poisonous minions around. Still, it's merely balanced, not overpowered, and the best decks aren't looking for the former but the latter.

Voted Playable, but it's closer to Bad than it is to Very Good.

Quote from Lanko >>

 I've have been watching Hearthstone's Copa America and now most of HCT Sidney... and it was disgusting the amount of Big Priests in the former just trying to roll Barner on 3/4.

In Sidney it was even worse: Spiteful Priest was actually in a lot of lists. Some players were playing both Big Priest AND Spell Hunter with Barnes. 

When even in the professional scene highrolling is the main strategy to define champions, it's a clear sign we have serious problems with the meta or some cards.

Paladin, on the other hand, seems fine. You keep Call to Arms (and always pull 2s), you keep Tarim, you keep Steed, you can even add Turion to replace Vinecleaver. You keep Equality and Consecrate. You do lose Rallying Blade and Unidentified Maul, but I can definitely see a mid-range version of Dude Paladin going Evens.

Quote from Trollbert >>

So I'll throw out a few decks here as examples;

Big Priest

Naga Giants

Barnes Spell Hunter

The biggest things these decks have in common is a tremendous part of their win % depends on if they get the right cards in the opening hand.  Obviously as a card game RNG should be an element into your win rate, but these decks win rate swings tremendously if you get the right card or two in before the right turn.  If they get it, they are oppressive and almost impossible to beat, if they don't get it they are a cake walk.  

Now none of these decks have tier 0 or tier 1 win rates, but the big issue is are they fun to play against?  For example, if I am playing against Big Priest, I don't feel accomplished over running them on turn 6 because they didn't draw Barnes.  On the other end of that I don't feel too good about losing a game where Barnes pulls Y'sharrj on turn 3 who draws the 10/10 Y'sharrj and I really never had an opportunity to win or interact against the deck in any significant way?

So how do you feel about the 'high roll' play style?  

I think the control game plan is to rely on hero power mostly late, so for control decks I am inclined to agree.

However, for aggro/tempo decks (particularly Hunter, Mage, Paladin and Rogue), I don't think they're interested in investing in the late game, and could possibly use Genn to get a lot more midgame reach through Hero Power value.

I don't think any deck would use Baku at all, except maybe some control Warrior.

Quote from Anatak89 >>

I love to analyze stats as much as the next guy.  And this is interesting.  But humans can be very tricky to predict sometimes haha.

As for the reason people play spell hunter, wouldn't it simply be because... They enjoy playing it?  I still play lots of miracle rogue (I think with a 57% win rate this season in 40 ish games).  I'm not sure where miracle rogue fits in your simulation (obviously one of the bottom 25% or whatever).  I still switch in murloc paladin and secret mage for quest reasons.

Obviously I'm just one guy lol, but I simply have more fun playing the "off-meta" miracle deck, compared to playing a faster deck.  People like to win, but people like to also optimize their "fun factor", if you will, while winning.  I feel like this whole prediction kinda ignores that.

Quote from inhigo >>

 

Quote from SMcB >>

 

Quote from inhigo >>

If you were to keep simulating long enough, all people would be playing +50% winrate decks, which is stupid.

 This is clearly impossible. The global average winrate of Ranked play is always exactly 50%, so unless every archetype has a 50% winrate there will always be winners and losers.

 

 did you read what I wrote? just before that quote I stated the same...

does your simulation include  that?

Quote from Biddio92 >>

Probably too specific.

Quote from Alphalegend91 >>

I'm predicting that they won't release a single 1 or 2 mana echo minion due to the fact that it would completely break quest rogue. Even at 2 mana you could play 2 on turn 4, shadowstep one of them, and then play 3 the next turn to finish the quest. What do you guys think? Agree or disagree?

Quote from Alphalegend91 >>

I'm predicting that they won't release a single 1 or 2 mana echo minion due to the fact that it would completely break quest rogue. Even at 2 mana you could play 2 on turn 4, shadowstep one of them, and then play 3 the next turn to finish the quest. What do you guys think? Agree or disagree?