Hearthpwn

Remember also, that due to rotation next year, this might just be a small contribution to the future of murloc paladin in standard. That, plus the above mentioned anti- synergy with finja (cause that card is actually really good)

Paladin already has its buffed-exponentially-by-goon-cards Burnbristle, so does Warrior with their taunt card. Over all though, it seems as though each tri-class group has its own specialisation.

Kabal might have other Kazakus like cards (something like "3 mana 2/3, battlecry: create a 1-mana spell)

And what's the bet Lotus has something similar ;)

I think following blizzs design with c'thun buffing cards in more ways than you have is a good idea. One of the more important concepts with cthun is that he works while have a relatively small amount of cards dedicated to him. If this was going to be part of an actual expansion, you'd have 1/3 of the card pool dedicated to sargeras synergy

I think you should:

- Have one discover option list for all the cards with that effect, no need to have a different one for each class. There are much better ways to achieve a solid identity for each class' synergy with sargeras

- Have only 1 card per class (maybe not even all classes). This is where you'll have to make a fairly tough decision. I like the idea for dark portal but I'd rather the hounds be reduced by the same amount as sarge (with balancing of course). Rogue's Back-Obliterate is (despite the weird name) really good too. Basically the idea is that each class plays the same deck in very different ways without over-burdening the player with too many cards that do almost the exact same, really specific thing

I might just vote for the funniest lookin fella

I may just pick someone at random, don't care too much about watching but free packs are always welcome!

http://eu.battle.net/hearthstone/en/blog/20303036

Quote from Remster101 >>

70+ people is small?

Do you want it to be some kind of triple-a big budget monstrosity?

Maybe you want zombie mode or VR or something??

For pure fun I'd say burgler rogue.

Currently testing out poacher rogue, will post again if it turns out to be good ;)

Wall of text dissapearo!

Honestly, if you can't use this card effectively than you suck at the game lol

Quote from ImLikeWhoaaa >>

I would make it age restricted for 25+....and def make an in-client tourneymode..ban twitch-english casters in tournaments...dammit I cant stick to just one

Aggro freeze... sounds really interesting 

Do you have a decklist?

ok my bad i meant use the ideas of the competition winners.

Even those are often very unbalanced or just not what the game needs in its given state

1. flavour is nice to have but they should create the card itself before they theme them and limit the design space. and not every theme has to be wow based, but maybe wow cards sell better so they sacrifice gameplay for theme? :/

Actually flavour, artwork and the general look and feel of the game are of utmost importance. I would gander that a large proportion of hearthstones success can be directly attributed to it's sleek and simplistic design that still manages to inject a boatload of character and fun into the imagery

2. they started to ban some cards for arena (good idea) but arena has still the immense card pool (bad idea). there should be a wild mode for arena.

Maybe wild arena could be cool but there's no way they would suddenly start cutting vast swathes of cards from arena just to keep it simple. There's no need to either, as long as they keep balance and card complexity vs rarity in check. Plenty of cards have fairly complicated interactions but thankfully they are limited mostly to epic and legendary status. The vast majority of cards that appear are pretty straight forward and shouldn't be confusing any new players too much. Having said that the removing some cards from arena was a good idea, as that particular pool was obviously problematic

3. they give a damn about being origianal. they reprint cards over and over again just to full some open slots. this could be no problem, but they print cards like summon a x-cost minion and it can decide a game by giving you the better version of the card. there is no reason to have a vanilla 5/1 AND a 5/2 for 3 mana. so just printing 150 instead of 200 cards would be better for the game.

When I was talking about originality, i meant it less thematically and more practically, as in they can't just print another sen'jin shieldmasta or argent squire and give it a different name/artwork. As far as printing Ice Rager goes well, it's their right. It didn't ruin the game, neither did it usurp a previously viable card. I can't say I exactly understand what you're trying to say with your x-cost example, is that related to possibly getting ice over magma rager from faceless summoner or something?

4. I'm fine with that but if they would care about arena cards like mad scientist, minibot or muster wouldn't be a thing. maybe they they will handle things like that with banning card and creating more designspace. also they tried to make a reset with banning old cards for classic but they f*cked it up by letting some broken unnerfed and the spiral of powercreep started again.

Can you possibly see why retroactively changing things can just complicate things further? I mean, yeah the game is probably gonna need more n more of this ban style stuff as the card pool grows bigger. And yes, there will probably eventually be formats for arena too in the future. But surely you must agree that, not unlike nerfs, they should be done with utmost discretion and as rarely as possible? One of the highest goals for the hearthstone development teams is accessibility, for both new players and old returning ones. Too many changes to the core of the game might be pushing a tether that may, one day, snap.

5.priest has the worst classic/basic set so priest is always the biggest looser after a new season. another point is there should be a cycle in the meta with at least 5 classes imo but there isn't. there are 3 decks played for more then 50% of the games and even more higher up the ranks. aggro shaman, token yogg druid and dragon warrior. and the first 3 turns aka draw is more important than counter the meta.

I think people don't realise how momentous a task like this can be. As much testing as blizz can do, certain things will take them by surprise, there's just too much unpredictability. And, as stated before, retroactive balancing can be just as harmful as it is good. The kind of statistics that you talk about are definitely higher than the rank I gravitate but it's only natural that the higher the rank the narrower the meta becomes. If that's a fundamental problem of yours with this game then you might wanna reconsider playing competitive card games.

6. ofc but the playerbase will shrink if the game isnt fun anymore. most people i know just go on play the daily and play another game. the shop is just to expensive for a new guy to get into the game and as an beta player you can just play it for free. hearthstone would be perfect as an subscription based game (or with WAY cheaper shop or 30€ for the whole classic set?) but they went the f2p route and now they are boned because the cant change the system.

First of all, compared to some other ccg's out there, hearthstone is an absolute gem price wise. The only other one's that are on par gameplay wise, that have cheaper models (ES comes to mind), are companies trying to squeeze in on a market that blizzard virtually created. As for suggesting other models you're going to have to suggest something waaaay better than subscriptions, which even huge MMO's have almost entirely abandoned

and they try is so hard but without changing another big part of the game or even the business model i cant see a way to keep hearthstone balanced and fun at the same time.

and even pros are complaining about rng in hearthstone. some rng is fine but every new expansion some other HUGE rng related feature gets released and competetive hearthstone gets even more boring. *coughtshredder'n'boomnowyoggcouth*

Well that's easy cause balanced is  fun.

On rng..... *pinches nose* .... look if you want to play rng-less hearthstone go take your basic set and play at rank 25. Fact of the matter is rng is what makes hearthstone competitive.  The only skills involved in the game are deck building, decision making and risk assessment. Of these, being able to weigh probabilities is the most valuable. Deck making may as well be a moot point with all the net decking going about and decision making is the bare minimum as regards to skill (e.g. should I equip fireaxe and kill that trogg or just armour?). The most powerful cards and plays in hearthstone should be, and mostly are, high risk/reward.

As for pros, well.... fuck 'em, dey don't kno shiiii

This and rockbiter were exactly the nerfs required to bring shaman down to reasonable power levels. Anyone saying that tuskarr was not op as shit and the main problem with shammy is either an idiot or wearing some very rosy (or navy blue) tinted lenses.

Rockbiter is possibly an unfortunate loss but I feel it may be necessary in the long run

Yogg nerf is hectic good. The only reason they made it not stop casting when it died was because the designers really liked the card and wanted it to see play. It never really made sense that way and neither did overload not affecting the player.

To those saying that yogg is unplayable now.. just lol. I mean seriously, you wanted to be able to play him on an empty board and win? And that's not op?