Hearthpwn

USE LUBE WHEN YOU FUCK LIFESTEAL, IT'S VERY DRY IN THERE

I did a Smuggler's Run, Grimestreet Outfitter, Wickerflame Burnbristle, and Paragon of Light. Whatever they ban, you end up with a hand full of massive lifesteal taunt. Decently solid.

Not to worry! I've done a quick Google and so far as I can tell, this is the first CCG to be titled Rise of Shadows. Originality intact!

As for whether it's dumb or not, we'll have to wait and see if it can talk. Perhaps they'll release an interview with the name and we can confirm it's dumbness.

Yeah! Fuck it! Whooo! Down with the system! Now go start a car fire and throw some trash cans through pizzeria windows. That'll learn 'em!

I've been spending most of my time recently in Standard Casual with a Priest deck focused around card copying. Unless I'm facing a balls to the wall aggro deck, I have a reasonably good chance of winning. There is no win condition in the deck itself, I must copy my opponent's.

What I've been noticing is that when I do win with my op's win condition, I hardly ever get to actually finish the game. More often than not, I get a rage quit. From my perspective, I got really lucky and had some fun and just happened to win with a stupid deck, but my ops obviously have a different view.

It's been happening so much recently that I thought I would get the community's sense of things. What is so rage inducing about losing to a copy deck that they can't just concede, they must close the client?

Quote from KingCarnage >>

The secret quest deck looks like a decent blend of 2 decks thought hunter is too cheesy to be interesting in most cases. 

Cheesy or not, it's a very fun deck to play and so very satisfying to get that quest done twice. As your signature line says, Fun > Meta ;)

Are you actually getting wins with the dragon deck? Dire Frenzy on only 3 possible targets looks rough. Bloodscalp is new but surely I havent seen it used anywhere. A few weeks ago i made a couple zooish hunter deck just to see if it could be interesting. I became confused on what 2-3 types i wanted to use out of beast/pirate/murloc(could have gone mech).

I am getting wins! The Dire Frenzy might seem a bit much with only five beasts in the deck, but that's because it's mainly there for the Scaleworms. Using Stitched Tracker can get you two more beasts and if you've frenzied, then those beats will be supercharged. Also, with Deathstalker Rexxar giving you even more target, Dire Frenzy sees good play. The goal of the deck is control, so taking it slow, being flexible, and responding to the board is the game plan.

The reality is that the current set of dragons are so, so good at controlling board, they can almost fit in any deck. Because Hunter has Carrion Drake as well, they work even better here and the opponent never suspects a 3/7 Poisonous, which I think is the strongest Poisonous minion in terms of raw stats in the game.

The key to the deck working so well is that it's unexpected: they don't know what extra spells I have and they never suspect dragons, so they'll play right into a Dragonmaw Scorcher or Crowd Roaster.

Quote from iandakar >>

Quote from whythemy >>

The idea of a class does not necessarily change when a Classic or Basic representative of that classes' identity is altered. A Fireball is still a direct damage spell, whether it's 4 mana or 5 or 6. At the same time, these cards have not been nerfed as they are not problem cards that limit design space.

The concept of a required card is a not so certain one. The goal, as I understand it to be, is determining whether a class identity card present in the majority of that classes' archetypes limits the design and creative spaces for the other classes as well as the class itself. To take an example from your list, Fireball does not limit the design/creative space for the other eight classes. Likewise Swipe, etc; they are not problems. Equality at 2 mana does limit the D&C space of the other classes, at least where the game stands right now.

I believe the difficulty might be one of perception: this class needs X card to remain viable and keep the flavor of that class. For example, the broader themes of Paladin does not suffer at the nerfing of Equality. The ability to field a small army and then empower them as a leader through the blessing of the light while leading from the front with weapons. That could be as good an understanding of Paladin identity as any other. Class identity should not swing on the hinge of one or two Classic/Basic cards. Instead, the entirely of the C&B sets should be taken into consideration. This allows future expansions to explore the boundaries of that base identity. In Boomsday, Paladin got the ability to field a small army of mechs and empower them with magnetics. Same identity, different execution of it.

 A question if I may:  Why does a class need an identity that requires certain cards and mechanics?  That is, why does Mage need fireball?

Let's say that we completely eliminated ALL of mages' cards, including fireball, today, and were tasked with making a new set of cards?  Would we REALLY need to give mage a new fireball, or could we create a new style of gameplay into the class ?  Instead of fireballs, the class focuses on transmuting matter:  spells that turn minions into different minions, or the ability to take a minion and turn it into a weapon or the other way around?  That would still feel like a 'mage', but wouldn't have anyhthing to do with big board clearing spells and burn. 

Same goes for other classes.  We could make Paladin have Ramp by having minions that Led other mininos, making them cheaper to play or flat out giving you mana. 

The point is, if we removed all of the 'identifying' cards from a class, could we not then use the open plain to give them new cards with different mechanics but keep the same theme?

That is, is a druid a druid because their cards involve nature, or because they Ramp?  And if the latter, how do we avoid the game being stale when Hunter Must Face and Paladin Must Buff and Druid Must Ramp?

Class identity is necessary to create boundaries between classes so they don't overlap. These boundaries, first set by the Classic and Basic sets, provide the design space structure in which to work. So long as class cards fit within those boundaries (whatever they might be) and do not overly infringe upon other classes' boundaries, they fit with the class identity.

As this point in Hearthstone's life-cycle, I agree with you. Mage does not need Fireball because it has a class identity outlined by the recent expansions. If Blizzard really wants to make each "Year of" cycle feel energized, they should do the Kibler plan and get rid of or severely limit the available Classic and Basic cards available. Frankly, they should also give consideration to the plausibility of changing the base hero powers each cycle as well. Does Hunter really have to just shoot face? Why can't Rexxar do something different that embodies the spirit of hunters?

I further agree with you that class identity can and should shift each cycle. I have been enjoying the hand mage archetype that 2018 gave us, for example. When I think about class identity and such, my mind always goes back to the recent Ixalan sets for Magic. They had white mana vampires that represent the noble, religious knighthood of that plane. It was a completely different expression of what could have easily been the same ol', same ol'. It would be very exciting to see Hearthstone do something similar in such a large way.

Quote from PinkGhost

 

>This is the first good counter point I've seen on this thread. I guess I don't think we should worry about cards making it into a lot of decks as much as we should worry about how fair/unfair they are. Like I said earlier Undertaker definitely deserved it and for the same reason I think cards like Mana Wyrm did as well, because if those cards were drawn early they could just win you the game. Hence, unfair. But while I agree that game designers completely have the right to make any design changes they desire, I don't think that means they always should. Rather I think sometimes they can't without them betraying the player-base. Imagine if Blizz decided to nerf Fireball or Swipe, Northshire Cleric or Flame Imp or even Frothing Berserker, these nerfs wouldn't just change decks, they would change our very idea of the classes themselves, because each of these cards represents something a class has always been able to do. Maybe nerf them if they become too strong or their mechanics become too easy to abuse, but not just because they're being used a lot. You might just ruin the entire theme of the class.

The idea of a class does not necessarily change when a Classic or Basic representative of that classes' identity is altered. A Fireball is still a direct damage spell, whether it's 4 mana or 5 or 6. At the same time, these cards have not been nerfed as they are not problem cards that limit design space.

The concept of a required card is a not so certain one. The goal, as I understand it to be, is determining whether a class identity card present in the majority of that classes' archetypes limits the design and creative spaces for the other classes as well as the class itself. To take an example from your list, Fireball does not limit the design/creative space for the other eight classes. Likewise Swipe, etc; they are not problems. Equality at 2 mana does limit the D&C space of the other classes, at least where the game stands right now.

I believe the difficulty might be one of perception: this class needs X card to remain viable and keep the flavor of that class. For example, the broader themes of Paladin does not suffer at the nerfing of Equality. The ability to field a small army and then empower them as a leader through the blessing of the light while leading from the front with weapons. That could be as good an understanding of Paladin identity as any other. Class identity should not swing on the hinge of one or two Classic/Basic cards. Instead, the entirely of the C&B sets should be taken into consideration. This allows future expansions to explore the boundaries of that base identity. In Boomsday, Paladin got the ability to field a small army of mechs and empower them with magnetics. Same identity, different execution of it.

No avatar - check.

"Am i the only one" title check.

Must be shit posting time.

Quote from newqqnew >>

People that plays wild hated Big priest high roll with Barnes and now we see more ressurect cards with total disregard for a healthy wild game.  Totally uncreative in my opinion 

 Because. Wild. Doesn't. Fucking. Matter.

Everything ever released from now until the end of the game will buff wild decks because wild is an eternal format. It will only get more degenerate because that's what eternal formats do.

I'm not going to pay 50euro for 50 packs. The value is absolutely horendous. You will get 1200dust, two garbage legendaries and no good cards to make decks from. Fuck this.

What is a Hearthstone expansion announcement without leaks anyway?

Yeah, you're right.

Blizzard already confirmed that Druid will not receive a single new card next expansion, so the class is indeed doomed. 

Rest in peace :(

God fucking damn it blizzard, you are just going ignore jades???

"Well this turn I'll summon a larger and larger man, which will allow me later on to summon an even larger man..."

Don't EVER print anything like these cards ever again. I'm already seriously pissed that I'll have to live with them in wild forever now.

Yessss more RNG! Can't wait to lose the coin flip 5 times and then finally get lucky and walk away from this fucking brawl with my free pack. 

"Hearthstone is Home" new expansion confirmed.

Probably Mind Control Tech and hopefully Divine Spirit

As for your speculations, so far there are only classic set cards in the hall of fame, no reason for that to suddenly change.

Because Elekks are used to transport things... so it is transporting cards into your deck?