• 1

    posted a message on My Opinion about The New Heroskins
    Quote from MoonlightSZN >>
    Quote from hoernsen >>

    I really don't understand why people always complain about the costs of cosmetics. If you don't like the skins, don't buy it. It's easy as that. When you look at the cost of CoD Warzone, there is one Operator Skin, mostly 2 Weapon Blueprints and 3-4 other cosmetics for 20+$. Same goes for Fortnite and enough other games. Theses games are free and need the shop incomes to provide further support for the game. I play Warzone regularly and never bought something from the shop, because i thinks it's way to expensive. But never ever would i complain about it. It's only cosmetics....

     If they need the income they can offer content that we actually want for that price.

    To be fair - you don't speak for the community, and no one else does . . .

    In any event, there are 24 million of us, and it's a pretty heterogeneous bunch. Presumably, a very small portion of those people care about cosmetics, and an even smaller portion enjoy complaining about cosmetics on casual gaming fan-sites. Presumably, you don't belong to first group, but do belong to the second. There is a third group - folks who don't mind spending money on the game in order to purchase some cosmetics. Lots of folks in the second group like to complain about them - it's a free country, and they ought to complain if they feel like it. But you'll also have to concede - that doesn't mean their complaints have any merit.


    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 2

    posted a message on Classic format Will Fail

    A couple weeks ago, the folks who make the Firestone app tweeted a graph of play-mode play-rates, and posted it on the subreddit - Standard is about twice as popular as BG, and everything else (Arena, Wild, TBs, Duels, PvE content) is about one-third as popular as BG, though Duels is played slightly more than the others.

    The take-away is that millions of people play each play-mode every day, and a couple of those modes are more popular than others. If "failure" means "not as popular as Standard or BG" then everything aside from those two modes is a failure. If it means "not played millions of times each day" then none of the modes is a failure - despite all the community shit-posting to the contrary. I suspect Classic Mode will not be as popular as Standard or BG, but it will be as popular as everything else - i.e. millions of games will be played every day, instead of tens of millions.


    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on Weekly Community AMA From Dean "Iksar" Ayala - Basic/Classic Set Rework, Reward Track, 2v2 Mode & More
    Quote from Tarious >>

    1)Can we all agree that Sorcerer's Apprentice needs to go during rotation?

    2)Juicy Psychmelon  was a core card for Malygos decks for a while. Glide is just waiting for the right time to be played. Meta is too fast atm and using it on your opponent could help them.

    3)Discover does NOT add a lot to the game. Blizz has gotten into the habit of both overusing and undervaluing it. Most of the time, the mechanic is pretty much "Discover an answer". There's WAY Too much card generation in the last 2 years added to the game. It's hard to run someone out of resources nowadays.

    I don't think Glide is "just waiting" for the meta-game to slow down. Judging by the HSReplays numbers, the card has among the lowest played win-rates in Standard at 31%. Magma Rager is 34%. Nor is it much better against the slow decks it is presumably meant to punish (39% against Highlander Mage and Ticklock.) Presumably, aggressive decks are better off simply playing cards that kill their opponent, rather than cards that try to mess up their hand. In most cases, Glide is like a 4-mana Secret Passage in a class that already has plenty of much better card draw options. As it is, 1-mana Secret Passage only has a 50% played win-rate.

    Posted in: News
  • 1

    posted a message on Whats everyone's opinion on wild?

    FWIW - during Scholomance, most of the Wild streamers and podcasters were agreed that Wild was in its best state since the format split in 2016. The current meta-game isn't too far removed from that. There are diminishing returns to nerfing stuff in Eternal formats, given that the gap between top-tier decks and not top-tier decks is generally a lot wider - folks will be playing Reno decks, Odd decks, Secret decks, Big decks, etc, ten years from now, regardless of what gets nerfed today . . .

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 1

    posted a message on Is there a reason to put any card that cost more than 4 in todays meta?

    Looking at the HSReplays numbers, 83 cards above 4-mana currently possess play-rates above 2%. Of those cards, 64 are meant to be hard-casted, while the rest either enter play at a reduced cost, or allow other cards to enter play at a reduced cost. I didn't count expensive value-generators, like Queen Alex, or Y'sharrj, which generate cheap stuff, but have to be hard-casted themselves (hard-casting those expensive cards is essentially the opportunity cost that has to be paid, in order to get the cheap stuff.)

    To answer the OP's question - yes.

    The 64 hard-casted cards above 4-mana serve a wide variety of roles in the game. Some of them (9) are big Taunts, while others (13) are either AoE or targeted removal. Some of them (typically more expensive) are single-card win-cons, like the Galakronds, Old Gods and Alex, while others (18) simply generate lots of cards in hand, in deck, or directly onto the board. Since the OP's bar was set so low, many (11) of the cheaper cards, like Faceless Corruptor or Krastinov, simply see play because 5-mana isn't too much to pay. A few tech-cards (3), like Stickyfinger, also make the cut.

    Posted in: Standard Format
  • 2

    posted a message on Help! I haven't played since 2016!

    Welcome back.

    There are currently some very fun & competitive Rogue decks in Standard. Here are some links -

    Trump's Secret Rogue-


    Dekkster's Weapon Rogue-


    Regis' Burgle Rogue-


    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 5

    posted a message on Introducing the Darkmoon Races Mini-Set! - All New Cards! - Release 21st of January!

    You earn over 15,000 XP each week - more than 500 gold. Assuming the next expansion launches in mid-April, about twelve weeks from now, your "incentive" to play the game is sixty free packs.

    "...little to no gold..."

    Posted in: News
  • 2

    posted a message on Zeddy Hearthstone Needs a Slight Reality Check

    Personally, I stopped watching the "Blizzard Lies" video as soon as the personal attacks began. It seemed pretty clear that the fellow was simply cashing in on the latest reddit shit-storm - his own shit-storm videos get about ten times as many views as his regular content.

    FWIW - the game has never seemed more F2P friendly. Under the old system, completing Dailies rewarded about 7500 gold for each expansion. Owing to no-duplicate protection, those 75 packs produce full sets of Commons and Rares (86 cards in Darkmoon), and about 15 different Epics and 5 different Legendaries. With the dust from duplicates, golds and trash Epics and Legendaries, any F2P will be able to craft one or two good Legendaries, and two or three Epics. Call the total 110 cards. That's 82% of the set, for free, about twenty minutes after the set launches. Blizzard also gives the F2Ps an additional pair of Legendaries on the Reward Track. After a week of play, F2Ps can easily have 85%-90% of a new set without ever spending any money on it.

    As far as the new system  goes - the new system was announced with plenty of promises. One of them wasn't "on launch day, you will be able to accurately calculate how much gold you'll earn over the next four months, because we won't be adding anything else to the reward track." In fact, one of the people who was called a liar made the opposite promise on the subreddit, weeks before the system actually launched - "going forward, new content will be added." Pointing out that the comment was made earned some bastard 170 down-votes (probably more, by now). Blizzard has already added 1300 gold to the track, after deleting the shitty late-track rewards - it isn't exactly unlikely that more shit will be added during special events or seasonal promotions.

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 2

    posted a message on Animal Companion shouldn't be random

    FWIW - the numbers on HSReplays suggest that the card is already one of the highest "win-rate when drawn" and "win-rate when played" cards at 3-mana in the class. Different classes excel at different aspects of the game - if AC were a Warlock or Mage card, it wouldn't  see much play. But it's not. The three Hunter decks which currently run the card already dominate the Mage and Druid decks the OP cites as "better" 3-mana decks - and they do fine against DH, with win-rates in the mid- to high-40s.

    Instead of complaining about a problem that doesn't appear to exist, it might prove more rewarding to the OP to figure out why Hunter has win-rates in the 60s and low-70s against the decks he cites as having "better" early-game plays . . .

    Posted in: General Discussion
  • 2

    posted a message on Why wasn't Mozaki Mage nerfed?

    Judging by the HSReplays numbers, the deck has a 44% win-rate and 1% play-rate - a nerf might not be needed . . .

    Posted in: Standard Format
  • To post a comment, please login or register a new account.