Hearthpwn

You need to clear their board and pressure them into using the extra turn defensively rather than agressively. I don't think the dragon priest deck runs much in the way of removal, so if you can stick a board you probably end up favoured.

That said, like all current top decks, there will be many occassions when your actions make no difference and you just lose to massive burst.  If you don't clear their board though you are asking to lose!

The coin says "Gain a mana crystal this turn".  I was on three crystals and played the coin to go to 4 crystals so I could play Desert Nestmatron.  To my surprise I only gained 3 back when he refreshed my mana.  Surely I should still have the temporary mana crystal rom the coin?  It's the same turn.  I know it's a niche interaction, but it's likely true with Eonar as well.

Not sure how you would re-word it, but it's not doing what it says (imo).

Quote from D_Lord >>

Quote from emkarab >>

Quote from D_Lord >>

Quote from emkarab >>

Quote from D_Lord >>

Quote from emkarab >>

Of course it is a problem. You cannot compete against Warrior as control deck even if you can win with aggro decks. Brann is simply too powerful. Yes, Shaman is also a problem, but Warrior is even more annoying.

 You cannot build ctrl decks because combo decks are too fast and popular. If priest had better tools and could go above 30 health more easily, it would also be good in this meta. If your biggest problem is singleton warrior, run Helya, The Primus and the rest of the plague package in a ctrl shell. You will lose against many other decks (like shaman and both rogues), but cancelling Brann is not that hard and the deck just loses on board afterwards

 You don't see the point. Yes, there is one class able to cancel Brann, DK and he does and so Rainbow DK is tier 2 deck and Plague DK is tier 3 deck at 1k legend and even better below. So their ability to cancel Brann is what makes them viable or semiviable. What other control decks are? Rainbow Mage (tier 2) and Wheellock (tier 3) who can end game fast enough with Sif and Wheel. And nothing else. Shaman Highlander is unplayable, Priest Highlander is unplayable, any other control deck is unplayable because of Brann, not aggro. Remove Brann and you will see a lot more control decks in meta.

 You need to read back on this, bro. I literally said that the multiple aggro decks aren't the problem but that the problem is that too many decks can quickly close out games (like combo decks, or we can call them OTK decks as well). Rainbow Mage and Wheel are OTK decks, too. You literally agree to me here:) Shaman and/or priest Highlander would be more playable if there were fewer OTKs and combos or if there were more cards that gain armor/counter the wheel deck in some way for them. Highlander warrior is not unbeatable by outvaluing them, but in the end, it also turns into a combo/OTK deck with the random 10 mana spells for 1 mana and the Ignis weapon. Other classes lack access to more finishers than Ignis. That's why other ctrl decks suck against warrior.

For the record, this equals 4-5 ctrl decks (depending whether you consider Odyn non-highlander a ctrl deck, which I don't). That's actually not too bad considering the power level of combo decks these days.

What I agree with is that Nature Shaman which can bring you from 30 to 0 turn 5 is a problem. Other OTKs are not, both Wheellock and Rainbow Mage need much more time and are more vulnerable. And Highlander Warrior is now much more popular deck than Nature Shaman (only at 1k legend Nature Shaman is more popular). So if there are 2 decks that you would not be able to beat as  any non-otk/non-dk control, I think the much more popular one is the more problematic one.

 I generally agree because shaman is too fast but it doesn't really matter for slow, grindy ctrl decks whether you get killed by a combo on turn 5, 12 or whatever Sif is doing. The real problem is the lack of counterplay to combo decks in standard right now. You can delay with a Stomper and sure, that might work if you apply enough counter pressure. But there is nothing that can reliably prevent combos or at least delay some win conditions in a meaningful way. Like you should be able to delay by 3 turns at least or to gain enough health/armor to avoid getting one-shot by random card generators and/or insane spell damage amounts. Nobody plays Zola and that Celestial guy just to be able to play Stompers for 4 turns in a row with a coin on turn 5 (although this sounds lika a lot of fun against shaman).

I really hope for a mini set with a meaningful neutral card that counters these things more efficiently and some decent control tools for several classes that don't work right now

The problem with "counter cards" is that they either kill entire decks on their own, or they're not universally strong enough to matter.  Even if they are good enough it becomes a race to see who can draw X card first.   Speaker Stomper wrecks nature shaman and you can pretty much time it to perfection because they have to play flash of lightning the turn before.  Problem is, it's not very good against most other decks so you don't generally include it. 

The bigger issue for me is that I dont think OTK decks really belong in Hearthstone at all.  It's not like MTG where you can counter your opponents cards and do things on their turn.  Classic Hearthstone had no OTK's (that I can think of), and the original design philosophy definitely went against these existing (they even nerfed the classic "force of nature/savage roar" because it was too uninteractive).  The general game rules still follow that existing design though.  I know there were quite a few TTK with Alex, but even then there was more of an opportunity to do something (excluding ice block...), and assembliny the correct components was much more difficult.  These were nearly all 10 mana combos.

As for control tools - it won't matter imo.  As long as Wheel of Death exists, control cant.  Unless they make it unplayable, no classic control/value type decks can ever succeed because that one card will always defeat them. Control decks by their very design cant be fast fast enough to apply enough pressure, and board based pressure is very easy for Warlocks to deal with. 

I was having a think about the new quest requirements and I feel there might be some longer term negative knock-on effects, particularly because they require you to win.

1)  If we assume most people are mostly free to play, these quests are the main source of "income" for new cards for most players.  If you don't complete them you can't compete because over time your available cards will decrease.

2) if you can't compete you stop playing - it's no fun losing becase you dont have the cards to compete, and doing something which isn't fun over and over just be able to remain moderately competetive isn't sustainable.  Some people will spend money on the cards, but given the overwhelmingly negative feelings associated with this change I feel that most people wont.

3) if you stop playing there are fewer players and therefore more bots/longer queues.

4) The requirement to win will gradually force people to play meta decks, because home-brew decks just don't cut it anymore.  This reduces deck diversity in the game even more than it already is, because now you have to play meta decks to have a collection which stays relevant.  A non-meta deck likely requires 20+ games to win 10.  That's a lot of games in one week just for standard.  Add in the other weekly quests which may also require you to tweak a deck (and the daily quests which may not complete at all with your current deck) and you're looking at 40+ games a week.  Not a lot to some, and a huge number to others.  Many of these games could involve playing modes or decks you dont enjoy just to complete the quest.  For me the "win 5 brawls" quest already felt like a ball-ache depending on the brawl.  We've also seen people throwing games just to complete the quests - excellent design on Blizzards part.

5) If you don't have the cards to make the meta decks you end up back at point 1, because winning is very hard outside meta decks.

I think it behaves as expected though I can understand why you might think it doesn't.  It says "summon up to 6 hounds any that cant fit give the others 1+/1+". ("others" being the ones you just summoned).  It doens't say "give all hounds +1/+1 for each one that doesn't fit".

In your example the board is full or has a couple of spaces, so you summon 0 - 2 hounds and give the 0 - 2 hounds +6/+6 to +4/+4.

It would be absolutely busted (far more than it already is) if it did what you're proposing. It would be like mega bloodlust if the board was already mostly full of Hounds.

My intention with this isn't to gut any one deck, but instead to try and make more decks viable and slightly slow down the game while also giving you a sense that there is something you could actually do to increase your chance to win. At the moment certain match-ups are basically un-winable for certain decks and that's not great game design.  I haven't proposed any changes to nature shaman because there are already very effective tech cards which people can put in their decks - they work especially well against this deck due to the requirement to anounce that you are going all in next turn.

If I was to try and fix the meta I would change the following...

1) Highlander - "start of game" effect rather than current deck.  Stops entire deck types being countered by one class and makes the highlander limitation impact all decks.  (i.e. you cant just draw your deck super quick then get the benefit of highlander).  Having to play highlander is already a huge limitation and it's just not fun to know that you've probably lost just because the opponent is a death knight. 

2) Brann - "your first battlecry each turn triggers twice".   Wouldn't kill boomboss (or the deck imo) but would slow down some of the bullshit.  The impact might be pretty minimal.

3) Wheel of Death - triggers at the start of your turn instead of the end (effectively giving yout opponent one more turn, as it should have been in the first place).  You could just change the number but then the animation wouldn't fit.  Warlock probably needs some other adjustments too, but I'm not sure what I would target.  Probably location to 4 mana.

4) Steamcleaner, Demolition renovator and Starfish back in core. I know steamcleaner and demolition renovator are objectively bad, but at least having them in core gives you the feeling of being able to do something about Helya, Symphony and locations.  Similarly a neutral non-targeted silence feels like it would be a good fit right now too.

5) Jungle gym - 2 charges.  It puts out a huge amount of damage for 2 mana.

6) Timewinder Zarimi - maybe increase by 2 mana to lessen the cards that can be played alongside it. Not much point tweaking the requirement, because it's already very easy to fullfil it.  It will still be pretty busted imo.

7) Dunno what you do about rogue - the problem (as always) is shadowstep (and now Breakdance).  

No doubt people will disagree, but I have tried to be reasonable about my proposed changes.

How does this win?  Relentless pusuit doesn't work?

I don't really mind the one for ranked (though I don't agree with their stated reasoning for changing it), but if you're playing ranked with any regularity you'll probably win 15 games a week. 

But the one for Tavern Brawl, Arena or Battlegrounds.  What a joke!  I almost never play arena, I absolutely never play battlegrounds and I wont ever play at least 15 games of tavern brawl.  I have no idea if winning 15 games of battlegrounds is a lot, but it sounds like it might be.

This genuinely feels like the beginning of the end of Hearthstone.  I can see no good reason for this change except to force people to buy packs by limiting their gold, or to "encourage" people to pay to play arena.  Very cynical change imo.

Sorry to say this deck almost certainly wont work in Wild.  It's too slow and too fair!  It was a standard deck before the last rotation and it's lost a bunch of key cards now from a standard perspective , so it doesn't work there either.

Things move on it seems :(

They can't fix the meta.  There's a whole list of broken decks held in check by the next broken deck.  When they nerf DH, warlock will probably come to dominate the meta.  Then the meta will shift and it will be all hyper aggro to beat warlock and control warrior to beat hyper aggro.

They enabled (by design) a whole bunch of decks which are basically garaunteed to win against another "class" of deck.  Control will 100% lose to OTK & Wheel.  Wheel will lose to hyper aggro etc.  They've basically created paper, scissor, (Hearth)stone.

Problem is, paper, scissor stone is a shit game.  

p.s. I would add that the only reason it's not a complete shit show is that some people play decks more for fun than for winning.  Problem is, the ability of these home-brew decks to win now is getting smaller to the point that it's just not worth the effort.

I've made a similar comment about mana cheat and people responded in a similar manner to you.  "You must love yeti's bumping..!" 

Why does it follow that because they mana cheat isn't a good thing for the game that  they only want to play vanilla minions?  I'm not entirely against mana cheat, but it's become one of the main ways that you win in hearthstone - either through tempo that can't be overcome, or through OTK's.

Neither of these approaches are particularly interactive, and what's the point of the game if you don't interact with your opponent?

The specific issue with DH isn't just mana cheat on the weapon though.  It's the tutored weapon draw into tutored demon draw into the discover effect into the mana cheated demon which removes your board and does face damage into another mana cheated demon (neither of which can be interacted with) ....And it can all be repeated again.  Oh - and they get to play Reno and Kurtis to!

Powerful mechanics do make the game fun - I agree with you on that.  But they still need to balanced and mana is the way they do that.  Window shopper would see a lot less play if you had to pay full mana for it.  The mechanic is still the same though, so it should be just as much fun!

I replied in another thread, but for me, the game is just broken and/or unfun now.  I tend to enjoy more control sort of gameplay, but it just doesn't work anymore.

The decks I face on ladder...

Sif Mage (Discover bonanza then OTK), Tendril Reno Warrrior (shitshow, but arguably one of the fairer decks), Odin Warrior (basically OTK), Wheel Lock (super fun /s), DH - Window shopper - dead by turn 5/6, Token Hunter - dead by turn 5/6, Giant Rogue - dead by turn 5/6, Spell druid (OTK), Plague DK - inevitable unavoidable death as control, Shaman (OTK - not as popular since the nerf), Paladin - don't see much paladin these days, Priest - dragon OTK.

Everything in this game now is about excessive mana cheating or killing your opponent in one turn with no interaction.  There are so many broken cards and combos that I just dont see how you can fix it at this point.   For me it's not about it a particular deck being overpowered.  There will always be a best deck.  For me it's about the only types of deck that are viable. 

I don't want to play a game where I know I've lost the second I see what class my opponent is, but that's the state we're in now.   I can flip coins if I wanted to play that sort of game...

Quote from Kwugzilla >>

If plagues were no longer infinite, there would still be a counter to highlander: Plagues.  That's right.  They would still disrupt highlander game play without being infinite.

That's true, but at least you would sometimes get a window to play the cards you put in your deck and there might even be a strategy using your own discover/draw cards to deliberately pull extra duplciate plagues just to enable your Reno cards.

Personally,I don't think the infinite plagues is a good design, not because it directly counters highlander, but because any infinite, inevitable death that you can't directly interact with isn't fun (imo). 

I also think highlander should be a start of game effect.  Look at Demon Hunter - it's gets to play both it's powerful cards in duplicate (the weapon and Window Shopper) and consistently still has the option to use Reno.  Same was true with Druid back when Zephrys the Great was in standard.  Playing a normal highlander deck should be enough of a draw-back without the deck needing "in game" counters as well.  Imagine if Highlander was a start of game effect.  There's no way DH would play the Highlander version because it would be far too inconsistent, and the strength of the deck comes from weapon into cheap Window Shopper into cheap Maggy.

Completely agree.  If it's viable then it's no fun to play against, if it's not viable why bother designing it.  Once again a single card/class completely shuts out normal control/value decks. 

It also feels like the wording is wrong because its not 5 turns (it's 5 "end-of-turns") and, if you play wild, the ticking of the clock counts as an "end of turn effect" and as such can be doubled using Drakkari Enchanter.  It should say "at the end of turn the Wheel of death ticks down from 5". The opponent dies when it reaches zero."  Both problems solved....

There was a post a while back that did an analysis of the fallacy that is "tech cards" in a game like hearthstone.  I don't remember all the details, but the essence of it is that tech cards basically make you feel better about a matchup by giving you a sense of agency over a particular match-up, while in reality lowering your win rate against all other match-ups (and probably overall).  In short - they're a trap.

For a tech card to work and see play it really needs to be at a level like Rustrot Viper.  He is potentially viable in every match-up (due to Ignis) and can be traded when not needed.  Tradeable alone isn't enough though and you can't include all the relevant tech cards, because then you'll have a whole deck of tech!

Speaker Stomper is an interesting one, but only because nature shaman basically tells you they are going to kill you next turn when they play Flash of Lightning.  Even with that, he still doesn't see a huge amount of play.