Hearthpwn

In a vacuum, I get what he's saying, especially in constructed, since you have all the pool to work with.  And I'll give him some credit, that when I saw the dragon stuff I immediately thought priest, much like Blademaster is a priest card in neutral skin.  I can see not going wild in a small expansion as well in terms of releasing tier shifting cards.  

But this is garbage.  

Arena balance is a joke.  Class cards get a higher offering rate on top of neutrals, so this means you are more likely to get a Purify than you are to get a Kara Neutral.  I'm fine with them experimenting with self-silencing, but all it takes is to NOT put it in the common slot!  

Adventures are the ONE type of expansion where rarity only affects arena, so why oh why can't they try to get things right?  

It's not that hard!   Druid, Hunter, Rogue, and Warrior rarities look great.  Mage could use Firelands Portal as its rare if you care about moving them down at all.   Paladin could use the Templar as its rare if you want to boost it, otherwise leave it as is.  Warlock could stay, or if you want to encourage Discard Lock in arena, make the spell rare.  As noted make Purify rare and Priest is in a better place, easily.  

Quote from GetInTheFridge >>

Didn't they determine that the current translation of Prince Malchezaar is incorrect and that it actually reads "At the start of your turn"? Makes a lot more sense.

Quote from ameateye >>

Quote from Peachums >>

I'd hardly say it's terrible regardless of what it does, it could have an alexstraza effect or could act like mistcaller. The balance is dependent on what it does not just the start of the game mechanic 

 That's it, I don't want anything that will affect the game-play outside of the actual game process. Imagine a card that will initially set the health of each hero to 15/45. It will be even worse that malchezzar.

The whole idea of alextraza and the mistcaller is that you need to draw it and to play it (with the mistcaller the tempo loss is the main thing).

And sure, I didn't say it's OP or that it not worth it, I said that the idea is bad.

Quote from ameateye >>

I didn't talk about malchezzar specifically, I just don't want to have in my deck card that I don't want to play, just to effect the overall game.

I think you are missing the forest for the trees.  While I agree that anyone who has played a CCG will know that having a bigger deck is usually not a good thing, specifically as Malchezzar does, the fact that its in the game is very interesting.

You can add a card to your deck that never gets drawn (ie a mythical 30th card) but still has impact, and impact that has to be remembered by your opponent.

This is a step up in complexity to the game that gets us one step closer to permanent effects much like we have seen in various brawls.  I'm wondering if permanent effects are going to be the big mechanic of the set.  

I'd say the three most common neutral card drawers are Loot Horder, Azure Drake, and Acolyte of Pain.   You lose a good bit of tempo with all of them when you compare then to the best vanillas at the same mana cost, but they make up for them in synergy, or as, thomasvicfelix said, in a deck that you need to cycle through to get your win conditions.  Of the three, the only on that saw play in a tempo deck was Azure in Tempo Mages, and that was because of the synergy with spell damage... but even now most Tempo Mages go with Ethereal Conjurer for the guaranteed spell draw.  

I wouldn't run any of these in any tempo decks currently IMO.

Welcome!

Can you share your current deck, or at least suggest decks you like playing so we can point you in the right direction?

Its not needed in all decks, but im guessing you do have some conditional draw in your deck already.  Quick Draw and Kings Elekk etc.  Putting in Loot Horders and Azure Drakes is definitely a case by case basis.  I'd say the average deck overall has 2-3 cards that draw or generate something.

Nzoth to me is the winner since it goes in so many decktypes, including Rogue.  Plus it will last longer than Justicar in Standard.  All the decks you mention with the exception of Secret Pally seem slowish, so I don't know how fast they will climb.  

Casual mode is anything but.  I have no reason why people play that mode with serious decks other than that they want to try and crush on people.  I would recommend playing ANY mode but casual to get quests

Best pack I opened for TGT -

Quote from SlayaHS jump

Midrange, Facehunter or Hybrid are all the same, totally mindless

No. Not at all. Learn to play these different decks and come back.

Sure thing. The classic example of a win more card is bloodlust because with spells it' easier to explain.

First off, why is bloodlust a win more card?

While you could argue that Bloodlust is not much different then Savage Roar and thus must be equally good you leave out that unlike Savage Roar (thanks to FoN), Bloodlust requires a board presences to gain enough value to be worth being played. Now you have to look into statistics. How likely is it for you to have a board big enough were Bloodlust would gain more value then a different card. Then you have to think about how big the potential value is and here comes "win more" into play. For Bloodlust you need a decent board presence but that board presence is usually enough to win you the game anyway, just a turn later.

If bloodlust would give all your minions +3 attack + charge the potential value would be a lot bigger and more flexible.  

Would bloodlust always be considered bad  because it's a win more card? I would say, no. If we imagine a face heavy meta without a lot of removal or decks that abuse you having a board Bloodlust would work great but all in Hearthstone is about context and value. 

Now back to Mistcaller:

Multiple questions arise looking at that card:

1. what is the average board for other decks on T6/T7? Depending on how your mage is set up it can be very different. To make it easy let's just focus on two potential opponents face hunter and patron warrior.  With face hunter at t6 you are probably looking at means to survive longer or finish the game from your side because your HP is very low. Mistcaller itself does not provide any thread to the hunter and would probably just be ignored. Patron warrior on the other hand either has to execute it or swing at it with a weapon. With 4 HP it's incredibly easy to kill for Warrior but the value from the battlecry is already gained so that's something. Fact is: Mistcaller as a minion itself wont do anything and alows the enemy one turn more to develop a board and push for face.

2. But how big is the  value gain? Unless you are up against priest or control warrior most decks plan to finish you off at least until T10, many will try earlier. So you have let's say 4 turns to make the +1/1 count. Would a potential 8/8 boom make the difference from winning or losing? Probably not. To gain more value of this card, big creatures are probably not significant. That means you need low mana creatures but usually you want to play those in the early game. Even a dream flood with mechs which would get you the most value from the buff would just mean that you could not have played those cards in the early game which would mean you would't have any board control and mist caller didn't help with that.

3. In what deck does this fit? The most minion heavy mage deck would be Mech but that deck curves early. The only minion focused late game deck with Mage today is fatigue/grinder mage á la strifecro and even in that deck you have 11 spells and drawing into spells or having them in your hand greatly reduces the value of Mistcaller and in late game you have a few big bombs and 1/1 on them probably will not matter.

Conclusion:

Win more is not just used because it accelerate your win but because there usually is more stuff wrong with the card. In the case of mistcaller it's too little too late. If Mistcaller would be 3 mana 1/1 with the same effect, nobody would call it win more because T3 is not a turn were the play has to count in order to decide if you win or lose. The further you go on the mana curve the closer you are turns that decide the game and because of that every play has to count. That's why you hear people saying that every card has to have an instant impact on the board which I would not 100% agree with but it's pretty close to that. Could there be a good win more card/good enough to be played? Probably but I don't think Mistcaller counts for that.

So i had some free time and decided to work out the math of quest gold, comparing between before and after the new quests.

Before new quests:

40 gold quests=15/26, 60 gold quests=9/26, 100 gold quests (including spectate a friend)=2/26

So when u get a 40 gold quest, rerolling will give you = (14/25 x 40) + (9/25 x 60) + (2/25 x 100) = 22.4 + 21.6 + 8 = 52 gold. Which means if you roll a 40 gold quest, you are expected to get a 52 gold (imaginary) quest.

Now, with the new quests:

40 gold quests=15/36, 50 gold quests=9/36, 60 gold quests=10/36, 100 gold quests (including spectate a friend) = 2/36

Rolling a 40 gold quest gives you = (14/35 x 40) + (9/35 x 50) + (10/35 x 60) + (2/35 x 100) = 16 + 12.86 + 17.14 + 5.71 = 51.71 gold

Rolling a 50 gold quest gives you = (15/35 x 40) + (8/35 x 50) + (10/35 x 60) + (2/35 x 100) = 17.14 + 11.43 + 17.14 + 5.71 = 51.42 gold

Conclusion, rolling a 40 gold quest gives you less gold now compared to before. And you should roll 50 gold quests for +ve EV, although it's only 1.42 gold increase per quest rolled.

Also, if you have an empty quest log, the EV for new quest had reduced from 52 gold to 50 gold after the introduction of new quests.

If you are a player who can complete any quest without problems, then the introduction of new quests had reduced your gold gain from quests.

Medivh = Nefarian Alleria = Ragnaros

It isn't cancer.  It's a skill based deck.  That's why it's not all over the ladder in crap ranks.  Idiots realized they aren't good enough to netdeck it and win immediately.  Patron is actually an example of a deck that uses incredibly niche cards that aren't even viable anywhere else synergizing well enough to make a great deck.  It's literally the perfect way for a great deck to come together, rather than almost every other deck out there which is goodstuffs crammed together with the same other goodstuffs.

I think an important aspect to understand to truly answer your question is the fact cards aren't what makes you good at this game. You could probably give Kolento a well rounded deck with no legendaries or epics and I'm sure he could get to rank 2-5 assuming the deck had some synergy to it (think zoo/mech). And on the other side of that coin - I have friends who have probably spent $200-300 on the game and still can't break level 10. 

It reminds me a lot of some of my golfer friends who always have to have the newest and latest technology for their game. Whether it's a new $350 putter or a $500 driver - they feel like having expensive equipment is an important aspect of being a good golfer. Give Tiger Woods (2007 Tiger) a set of my grandfather's clubs and I'm sure he'd still be able to break 70 (again 2007 Tiger). 

Final thought on this note - it's not as though cards don't make any difference. Of course having Dr. Boom & Slyvannis and a full set of cards gives you an advantage but the bigger point is that investing time/having the cognitive skillset to me is more valuable then cards. 

FYI, midrange hunter is the strongest hunter deck, not facehunter. So i guess the future is now?