Hearthstone: Heroes of Warcraft Catch-all

Wasn’t Pocket Galaxy one of the cards that got buffed in Rise of the Mechs?

I crafted 2 legendaries very shortly after the expansion. The priest quest and the shaman quest. I don’t regret doing it, but it might have been unnecessary.

I got the shaman quest in a pack and am enjoying that deck quite a bit:

Haven’t crafted anything yet, but sitting in 6k dust.

RawkGWJ wrote:

Wasn’t Pocket Galaxy one of the cards that got buffed in Rise of the Mechs?

It was, but it was always a bit swingy in Cyclone Mage and has become a real problem (i.e. You almost always win if you play it on 4/5) in that insanely expensive 12 legendary Highlander Mage deck.

On the most recent episode of The Angry Chicken podcast they spent lots of time griping about warrior and mage. I’m not saying that their points are invalid but if you look at the stats on HSReplay you will see that neither mage nor warrior is dominating the meta. In fact, the most obvious trend that I see is that hunter and paladin have multiple tier 1 decks. And this has been the case for YEARS!

That’s most likely by design on Team5’s part. From a sales and marketing standpoint I can see the value of keeping both of those classes strong and versatile. It provides a viable path for free and budget players to have a relevant presence on the ladder. But maybe some of the other classes should get a chance to be the overwhelmingly dominant way to play.

The problem with Mage/Warrior (as the nerfs today show) is that they have a few specific cards that just decide matches by themselves. I'm actually surprised that Boom only got a mana nerf and didn't do something like remove the Armor Up power or reduce it to like ONE new mech per turn gets rush. But watching a coin into turn 4 Luna's into Kalecogos for a mana, then Antonidas for a mana, then like 3 fireballs in a turn... bleh. Like Boom was a 7 mana card that you had a higher winrate KEEPING in your opening hand where you couldn't use it for 7 turns... which is just... nooooooooooooo.

Things I'm surprised DIDN'T get hit... like at all some how. Divine Spirit/Inner Fire. Blizzard has killed a few Rogue cards that were "auto includes"... and somehow these two and their completely boring win condition is STILL a thing... but they can't really take it away either without giving a different win condition... which isn't going to happen with Extra Arms having just been nerfed back to where it was before. Also for Priest, Northshire Cleric. That card has been a problem for kiiiiiiiiind of forever when it comes to Priests. It takes skill to use correctly (like to know when to get rid of it before you deck yourself and die), but no one has anything nearly as good for Card Draw other than Rogue... and that's part of Rogue's shtick along with putting cards BACK in the deck after having drawn a bunch of them.

edit:
TLDR - I think it would be interesting if classes other than hunter or paladin got to have the meta-defining ladder decks.

-

Right. And I agree with everything you’ve said. Those nerfs are completely reasonable and warranted. When there are cards that have an effect of “if I draw it and play it I win. If I never draw it I probably lose.” then that’s bad for the game. It’s polarizing. It’s boring. It doesn’t require skill. It’s totally stifling to the meta.

But to play devil’s advocate, let’s look at the other side of the situation. For the past three years (I think that’s how long it’s been) hunter and paladin have been tier 1 classes. And at any given time those classes have had at least 2 viable decks. Sometimes they’ve had two tier 1 decks and two tier 2 decks at the same time. That can’t be said for any of the other classes for the past three years. Shaman and druid have had their moments, but when the meta stabilizes it’s almost always hunter and paladin who have the most powerful decks with the most versatility.

For a long time, I have been hoping to see one or two of the other nine classes get their moment to shine. Not by having 1 or 2 OP cards that eventually need to be nerfed, but by having a wealth of versatile cards that facilitate interesting gameplay decisions.

Sorry to rant. TBH, Hearthstone continues to be my most favorite and most played video game.

RawkGWJ wrote:

edit:
TLDR - I think it would be interesting if classes other than hunter or paladin got to have the meta-defining ladder decks.

-

Right. And I agree with everything you’ve said. Those nerfs are completely reasonable and warranted. When there are cards that have an effect of “if I draw it and play it I win. If I never draw it I probably lose.” then that’s bad for the game. It’s polarizing. It’s boring. It doesn’t require skill. It’s totally stifling to the meta.

But to play devil’s advocate, let’s look at the other side of the situation. For the past three years (I think that’s how long it’s been) hunter and paladin have been tier 1 classes. And at any given time those classes have had at least 2 viable decks. Sometimes they’ve had two tier 1 decks and two tier 2 decks at the same time. That can’t be said for any of the other classes for the past three years. Shaman and druid have had their moments, but when the meta stabilizes it’s almost always hunter and paladin who have the most powerful decks with the most versatility.

For a long time, I have been hoping to see one or two of the other nine classes get their moment to shine. Not by having 1 or 2 OP cards that eventually need to be nerfed, but by having a wealth of versatile cards that facilitate interesting gameplay decisions.

Sorry to rant. TBH, Hearthstone continues to be my most favorite and most played video game.

Oh, I'm with you. I miss the days of midrange shaman both because I loved the deck and because it was tricky to play right and had some hilarious tech cards. Hello mage clearly waiting for turn 7 to Flamestrike, say hello to my two 0 mana health boosts for my totems and now everything is 6-7 health to your 4 to all, good luck!

Honestly, in spite of it having a less than stellar rating, I've somehow been killing it as Battlecry Shaman with Barista (which apparently has been taken OUT of most of those decks), Fountain Golem (no one expects the non-battlecry minion for stabilization), and a few others.

The paladin deck bothers me. For a class that creates minions already, having an even BETTER minion creation just seems like... I don't know. It seems REALLY stupid though. Like Blizzard somehow did NOT learn the lessons of Genn/Bakku that Paladin with a better hero power becomes unstoppable... and then decided their quest reward should be an even BETTER hero power.

As for hunter, yeaaaaaaaah. I like seeing a more controlling Secret Hunter out there, that's actually fun to me, seeing a highlander hunter (even if its win condition is somewhat boring) is kind of cool, especially when I did Yogg-n-Load and Reno Hunter way back at this point.

I have been playing that murloc paladin for a day or so. I wanted to experience its power first hand. Prismatic lens is disgusting! Just off the scales in power level. Once I coined > lens on turn 3 > turn 4 traded with murlocs that were on board > tip the scales. It’s just stupid!

This just in: Boom hero card now costs 9 up from 7. Conjurer’s calling now costs 4 up from 3. Barns got a nerf too. Prismatic stays as is. So does luna’s pocket galaxy. That is all.

I don’t have time to get into the details. I just wanted to make a short statement. I won’t be playing Hearthstone or any other blizzard games until they correct their actions. Hearthstone is a free to play game, but I have spent nearly a thousand dollars over the past four years on Hearthstone. Needless to say I won’t be giving Blizzard any money until they correct their actions.

RawkGWJ wrote:

I don’t have time to get into the details. I just wanted to make a short statement. I won’t be playing Hearthstone or any other blizzard games until they correct their actions. Hearthstone is a free to play game, but I have spent nearly a thousand dollars over the past four years on Hearthstone. Needless to say I won’t be giving Blizzard any money until they correct their actions.

Yeah, I couldn't give up WoW as that's a pretty big social thing for me, but HS would have been easy (I've been playing mostly single player on it anyway)... but they did issue a new statement.

Hello Blizzard Community . . .

I want to take a few minutes to talk to all of you about the Hearthstone Grandmasters tournament this past weekend. On Monday, we made the decision to take action against a player named blitzchung and two shoutcasters after the player shared his views on what’s happening in Hong Kong on our official broadcast channel.

At Blizzard, our vision is “to bring the world together through epic entertainment.” And we have core values that apply here: Think Globally; Lead Responsibly; and importantly, Every Voice Matters, encouraging everybody to share their point of view. The actions that we took over the weekend are causing people to question if we are still committed to these values. We absolutely are and I will explain.

Our esports programs are an expression of our vision and our values. Esports exist to create opportunities for players from around the world, from different cultures, and from different backgrounds, to come together to compete and share their passion for gaming. It is extremely important to us to protect these channels and the purpose they serve: to bring the world together through epic entertainment, celebrate our players, and build diverse and inclusive communities.

As to how those values apply in this case:

First, our official esports tournament broadcast was used as a platform for a winner of this event to share his views with the world.

We interview competitors who are at the top of their craft to share how they feel. We want to experience that moment with them. Hearing their excitement is a powerful way to bring us together.

Over the weekend, blitzchung used his segment to make a statement about the situation in Hong Kong—in violation of rules he acknowledged and understood, and this is why we took action.

Every Voice Matters, and we strongly encourage everyone in our community to share their viewpoints in the many places available to express themselves. However, the official broadcast needs to be about the tournament and to be a place where all are welcome. In support of that, we want to keep the official channels focused on the game.

Second, what is the role of shoutcasters for these broadcasts?

We hire shoutcasters to amplify the excitement of the game. They elevate the watchability and help the esports viewing experience stay focused on the tournament and our amazing players.

Third, were our actions based on the content of the message?

Part of Thinking Globally, Leading Responsibly, and Every Voice Matters is recognizing that we have players and fans in almost every country in the world. Our goal is to help players connect in areas of commonality, like their passion for our games, and create a sense of shared community.

The specific views expressed by blitzchung were NOT a factor in the decision we made. I want to be clear: our relationships in China had no influence on our decision.

We have these rules to keep the focus on the game and on the tournament to the benefit of a global audience, and that was the only consideration in the actions we took.

If this had been the opposing viewpoint delivered in the same divisive and deliberate way, we would have felt and acted the same.

OK, what could Blizzard have done better, and where do we go from here?

Over the past few days, many players, casters, esports fans, and employees have expressed concerns about how we determined the penalties. We’ve had a chance to pause, to listen to our community, and to reflect on what we could have done better. In hindsight, our process wasn’t adequate, and we reacted too quickly.

We want to ensure that we maintain a safe and inclusive environment for all our players, and that our rules and processes are clear. All of this is in service of another important Blizzard value—Play Nice; Play Fair.

In the tournament itself blitzchung *played* fair. We now believe he should receive his prizing. We understand that for some this is not about the prize, and perhaps for others it is disrespectful to even discuss it. That is not our intention.

But playing fair also includes appropriate pre-and post-match conduct, especially when a player accepts recognition for winning in a broadcast. When we think about the suspension, six months for blitzchung is more appropriate, after which time he can compete in the Hearthstone pro circuit again if he so chooses. There is a consequence for taking the conversation away from the purpose of the event and disrupting or derailing the broadcast.

With regard to the casters, remember their purpose is to keep the event focused on the tournament. That didn’t happen here, and we are setting their suspension to six months as well.

Moving forward, we will continue to apply tournament rules to ensure our official broadcasts remain focused on the game and are not a platform for divisive social or political views.

One of our goals at Blizzard is to make sure that every player, everywhere in the world, regardless of political views, religious beliefs, race, gender, or any other consideration always feels safe and welcome both competing in and playing our games.

At Blizzard, we are always listening and finding ways to improve—it is part of our culture. Thank you for your patience with us as we continue to learn.

Sincerely,

J. Allen Brack
President of Blizzard Entertainment

At this point, it sounds like a good chunk of Blizzard actually agree with Kibler's statement on the matter... or at least took that kind of feedback seriously and adjusted course.

I did a quick web search on Kibler and couldn’t find anything about how he feels on this matter. How I feel is this: For American businesses, the prospect of doing business in China looks to enable massively huge profits in a market that had been unavailable previously. For an established successful American business, expanding into the Chinese marketplace practically guarantees a windfall of titanic proportions. Businesses are driven by cash profits. It’s only natural for American businesses to pursue opportunities in China.

The problem is this: China is an authoritarian dictatorship while the US and other American countries are democratic. What are the American companies who are doing business in China supposed to do when the Chinese government decides to kill and incarcerate their citizens who are struggling to maintain their freedom? I’m not saying there’s an easy or simple answer.

What makes me uncomfortable about what Blizzard did, is it smacks of censorship of the worst kind. Blizzard is directly engaging in behavior that is meant to stifle the growth of democracy and freedom. I am not at all impressed with Blizzard’s statement regarding terms of service violations. Blizzard is placing profit above human rights.

Blizzard needs to do a lot more than just give Blitzchung his prize money before I can feel good about consuming their products again. These things take time. I’m sure there are people at Blizzard who are working 24/7 to come up with the proper way to handle this. American businesses have never been in this situation before. It’s completely unprecedented.

Boy am I glad I never got a Hearthstone related tattoo.

Blizzards statement is, maybe as expected, bad. If you screw up like this, then reducing the sentencing is not enough. Dont penalize either Blitchung or the casters for your own mistakes. Just give them a warning not to do anything like it again in a tournament. Taking away money people had rightfully earned was way over the top as a response.

On the other hand, I do think Blizzard, and other companies, do have the right to limit what their participants can talk about in events like a tournament. It is reasonable that Blizzard wouldn't want an esport winner to advocate for banning abortion one day, supporting putting children in cages the next etc.
And while it might be nice for companies to differentiate their policies based on whether the political messages are something we can agree with or not, their default stance kinda has to be that they dont want any of it.

What Blizzard should do here imo, was to come out themselves, as a company, "supporting the people of Hong Kongs basic human right to protest their government" or similar, while at the same time repeating that they want to keep their tournaments free of political messages from participants (except messages that are pre-approved at least, as is sometimes seen in sports).

Blizzcon is going to be extremely fascinating I think. They seem completely unable to control this. Hopefully people going there will take the opportunity to show what they think about Blizzard and Chinese censorship.

I think I Taliesin, WoW YouTuber kind of hits my opinion on the head.

As he notes, though, Kibler's statement, and his, as of now, that I can find, still current refusal to cast for Blizzard at the GM Finals for Blizzcon, are a bit more elegant... which can be found here.

Shadout wrote:

On the other hand, I do think Blizzard, and other companies, do have the right to limit what their participants can talk about in events like a tournament.

True. But stifling human rights advocates might turn your customers against you. That’s where I am at the moment.

Shadout wrote:

What Blizzard should do here imo, was to come out themselves, as a company, "supporting the people of Hong Kongs basic human right to protest their government"...

I agree with you 100%. But Blizzard did NOT do that. The reason they didn’t is because Blizzard would have disappeared from the Chinese marketplace almost instantly. China has a state controlled internet. They made the Houston Rockets (the most popular NBA team in China) disappear from the state controlled internet completely.

Blizzard may not be willing to turn their backs on hundreds of millions of dollars in the name of human rights. But I’m willing to turn my back on Blizzard if they choose money over human rights.

Shadout wrote:

On the other hand, I do think Blizzard, and other companies, do have the right to limit what their participants can talk about in events like a tournament.

I don't like companies doing this. For one, everything is inherently political. Any time there is someone playing in a Blizzard tournament they are saying they are okay with what Blizzard has done. They may not verbalize it, but their actions are enough. Second, if your protest is not distracting then there shouldn't be a problem. Wearing a Free Hong Kong t-shirt is no worse than kneeling.

Not saying I like that they act that way. Just that I think it is understandable why companies would prefer not to have people participating in their events talk about politics, or anything else not related to the event really. Thus having rules for going after people who do.
Blitzchung mentioned that he knew Blizzard would penalize him, and that he was fine with it. He did his thing anyway. Which makes him brave and heroic, similar to Kaepernick and others protesting in ways they know might hurt themselves.

I dont think the problem here is that Blizzard penalized this guy. The problem is how extreme the penalty was (in particular taking his money away), and that they clearly reacted that harshly because of Chinese influence.

Anyone playing Battlegrounds?

ranalin wrote:

Anyone playing Battlegrounds?

I don’t even know what that is.

RawkGWJ wrote:
ranalin wrote:

Anyone playing Battlegrounds?

I don’t even know what that is.

Basically Blizzard's response to DOTA Autochess and the like. It's fascinating to watch, but it is way too long for like a "while I'm on break" game.

So far I'm loving Battlegrounds. I've spent a good chunk of time watching streamers over the past week, so I feel I have a lot of the basics down already.
Very nice change from the usual Heathstone gameplay.
To Demosthenes point, I find each game's taking about ~20 minutes. I can usually sneak one game in on my lunch and then another sometime in the evening.

So is it through the Hearthstone client?

RawkGWJ wrote:

So is it through the Hearthstone client?

Yup. They've moved Tavern Brawl up one option on the title screen. Battlegrounds is selected using the Modes option at the bottom of the title screen.

The year of the Phoenix is upon us. With the new no duplicates policy in place I was wondering how many packs you would need to open to get most or all of the cards. I’ll post the breakdown here as I go.

After opening 30 packs...
- Common - I have 2 copies of every common card. Missing zero. Zero duplicates.
- Rare - missing 35 cards
- Epic - missing 46
- Legendary - missing 20 opened 4

edit1
I opened 20 more packs for a total of 50
- rare - missing 11
- epic - missing 38
- legendary - still missing 20. none opened.
- dust - +365

edit2
20 more for a total of 70
- rare - missing zero. some duplicates.
- epic - missing 35
- legendary - missing 18. got 2.
- dust - +465 (+830 total)

edit3
20 more. 90 total packs.
- epic - missing 29. only got 6.
- legendary - still missing 18. no new ones.
- dust - +755 for a total of +1585 dust.

I had 125 dust before I started opening packs, so I’m up to 1,710 dust. That’s enough to craft 2 legendaries.

I opened 6 legendaries in 90 packs. That’s 1 legendary for every 15 packs opened. I’m disappointed about that. I feel like I’ve gotten way more than that with previous expansions.

I'm afraid of the cost to get back into this game. How viable is it to play for free now, given that the last time I opened packs was probably 2+ years ago at leasT?

kergguz wrote:

I'm afraid of the cost to get back into this game. How viable is it to play for free now, given that the last time I opened packs was probably 2+ years ago at leasT?

That’s really hard to say. You could dip your toe back in by playing wild to get your quests done, and use the gold from that to play arena and earn card packs. You also get a free pack every week for tavern brawl. There’s also the new battlegrounds thing.

If your rank is really important to you, you might be disappointed. Even if you have several reliable decks, the time commitment to reach legend is just too much. I’ve been able to keep enjoying the game by not being concerned with rank. My main goal is to get golden heroes and have fun.

I have been playing daily and am really struggling with the new cards. I can't tell if its just because I don't have much from what was just released, or I just suck. I've never been the best at the game, so I am just playing to have fun like Rawk mentioned. With that said, not winning a match for like 10 games in a row can get exhausting.

For the past 2 years power creep has been a real thing in HS. The new batch is always going to have some very strong cards. Now the same goes with the new hero class. When demon hunter has been figured out, which should be in a few days, nothing will beat it. I’m sure the devs will nerf it but the question is when?

kergguz wrote:

I'm afraid of the cost to get back into this game. How viable is it to play for free now, given that the last time I opened packs was probably 2+ years ago at leasT?

Am I wrong in thinking returning players would get basically the full set of demon hunter cards not including the new expansion? (After completing the free solo wing to unlock DH)

Might be a way to be a bit more competitive off the hop

Hardek wrote:
kergguz wrote:

I'm afraid of the cost to get back into this game. How viable is it to play for free now, given that the last time I opened packs was probably 2+ years ago at leasT?

Am I wrong in thinking returning players would get basically the full set of demon hunter cards not including the new expansion? (After completing the free solo wing to unlock DH)

Might be a way to be a bit more competitive off the hop

I saw something about that myself, but unfortunately I logged into the game a couple of months ago and just pootled around in the menus. Didn't buy anything, didn't play a game, but unfortunately it probably removed my returning player flag.

@Rawk... Thanks for your response. I'm definitely not concerned about my rank, I think the highest I ever got in the old system was rank 7 before it became too grindy. But, losing 10 in a row doesn't sound fun.

This almost makes up for the dismal amount of legendaries I got in my first 90 packs.

IMAGE(https://i.postimg.cc/fTrxGgqh/985-A313-A-58-A3-4733-AA70-CC10-D66-D51-F5.png)