All Comments

About time they did something about Priestess of Fury.  Although I am mega bummed about the rogue and warlock nerfs.  

Quote From MurlocAggroB

Quote From JohnnyStorm

Quote From Alleria

Okay, I´ll make my confession too. My most favourite bad card was Malorne. I loved my meme Jungle Giants deck back then so much, I even crafted Malorne in gold... I know, I´m ashamed :D

I must be a noob but I don't understand why 7 mana 9/7 with no downside is a bad card.

I don't think Malorne would be bad nowadays, but it was basically useless back in GVG. Druids could not play Control decks or play for the long game, so Malorne was a dead draw that put endless dead draws into your deck. His shuffle was an actual downside. All Druid wanted to do was get minions on the board and deal incremental face damage, then set up for a Force of Nature (the Treats had Charge originally) + Savage Roar lethal. Naturalize and Poison Seeds were bad cards back then, just to give you an idea of the landscape.

Also, the card is trash in Wild because there are so many better options. There are faster ways to have infinite value if you want, and 2 attack over a War Golem is nothing. 

This pretty much sums it up, thanks MurlocAggroB :)

"PTR" stands for Public Test Realm, a location where the developers can introduce beta elements and make changes after player feedback and testing. It's a bridge between alpha still-in-development projects and actual live gameplay. Games like League of Legends and Overwatch do this; the implication is that Hearthstone's live state *is* the Public Test Realm, and we're all beta testers on a permanent basis. I don't necessarily agree with that assertion, but I believe that's what RavenSunHS is getting at.

Quote From sinti

Quote From AngryShuckie

I had written a big long response yesterday but that seems to have vanished, so I'll give the concise version:

Sorry, it was marked as spam, probably due to its length or possibly numerous edits in a quick succession, if that was the case. I restored the post, you may leave it or delete it at your pleasure :)

Cheers. I made 1 edit shortly after posting it, which was presumably the trigger since I was able to see it first to edit it.

I have done what I should have done to begin with and used spoilers to make it more manageable, and deleted the second post.

Maybe if people catch onto that Regis Quest Paladin deck. It seems pretty decent and could give the class a much needed viable deck that is not on meme tier status like Murloc Paladin.

No, you'll both be downvoted because the majority of people just straight up disagree with your opinion. "People like to be overwhelmed and get bitter at broken stuff"...have you even read your own sentence?

People like a living metagame, where things don't just get released and left alone for the rest of eternity. If you play an eternal format in card games, like Legacy in MtG, or Wild in Hearthstone, it is expected that things will change slowly, with like one or two strong things coming in per expansion, if you're lucky. Ever since the release of AoO, the Wild meta has barely had time to become stable, stale and boring. Why? Because the devs keep on meddling in it, changing things up, buffing things that disappointed, nerfing things that got a little too out of hand. I was at a point where I felt I got Buff Paladin kinda figured out, knew where its place was, no point testing it anymore and bam, Libram buff, time to give it another whirl.

It's good for competitive players to keep things fresh, and it's good for brewers like me who like to have things to discover and figure out constantly. It's just good for the health of the game to have an active development team rather than one that releases a 100 % guaranteed balanced and fine tuned set and the next time you hear of them is when the next one is coming up 4 months later. We've been there. We've seen it. We don't need to go back to it cause we know where it leads: the game gets boring and stale about a month into the new expansion.

I personally thought they will nerf Raging Felscreamer to a 5 mana 5/5 instead of Priestess of Fury, because I thought the latter was alright, but broken by Felscreamer and the ability to cheat the card on turn 5.

Also no nerfs to Altruis the Outcast where he should never damage your opponent's face? And no change to Kayn Sunfury where he either only has Rush or only he can avoid Taunts?

I also don't think there was anything wrong with Crimson Sigil Runner.

But buffs are nice. And other nerfs are decent too. But I was disappointed with DH nerfs, though nerfing Priestess is not a bad move.

My reaction was mostly over the game's overall powercreep and how DH should have had a beta stage rather than released as it was. Hearthstone feels frustrating right now because of those factors, at least to me.

I believe a more sensible design process could be made, mostly because it was made throughout HS's early history. I welcomed DH as something new and exciting for example, and I will welcome more bold ideas like these as long as they do it in a manner that allows for the game to react to those changes.

If DH was released as a beta like I said, all the changes announced would have been fine by me. The class needs games and time to be balanced. 

PS: Do you mind me asking what do you mean by "eternal PTR"?

100% agree.

I agree to all of this, but not the part about Torrent. There'll only be a change of the base cost, not how much it is reduced, so you'll have a 'one mana deal 8 to a minion' spell which is great imo!

Nice to see some buffs, especially the Attendant. I think the nerfs are all warranted except Scavenger's, it was fine as it was. I'm still not sure how the Stunner is better than sap, it shouldn't be. Imprisoned Warlock still feels bad to play against imo. I'm not sure Warrior is losing much.

You're wrong, the version that cuts Priestess is strictly worst, that card is one the best even in the worst matchups, like Warrior. Now at 5 health seems easier to deal with, which is good. Runner also didn't have any business having 2 attack stat.

Wasn't trying to make it sound like balancing was just a cash grab but upon rereading my comment I can see what you mean, maybe my reaction was a bit hotheaded.

I'm just not a fan of having around 19 nerfs in half an expansion cycle for standard alone (I could have miscounted) nor am I a fan of insane powercreeping (I recognize powercreep is a part of virtually every card game, but it appears a bit over the top these last 4 to 6 expansions). Even the buffs seem more like T5 is forcing archetypes right now rather than bringing more stuff or more interactions over more expansions. Just look at Libram Paladin: the archetype is relatively well balanced, but's not that great right now because of the overall powerlevel of the game. 3 years ago, however, it would have been borderline broken.

EDIT: I also gave an idea on how to get some data for balancing purposes without disrupting ranked or tournament gameplay. Losing a game that decided you're getting 100$ or 10000$ on a tournament because you just got steamrolled by broken cards over and over again seems very unfair.

Great changes! I love all of them

The Lurker Below might actually be viable now becuase it will no longer be insta ko'd by Eye Beam overall the balances seem really good Aldor Attendant might be good/strong because like Northshire Cleric is 1 cost and does a pretty good effect however i do belive the dh nerfs are a little bit weak the again i gont know how good a 7 mana 6/5 is in standard but i have a feeling dh will still be running Priestess of Fury after its nerf and 1 final note even with the buff Torrent will still be a bad card because now the mana reduction is less for torrent which gives shamans less reason to run the card 

thats all i have thank you for coming to my ted talk

edit: while reading again torrent i didnt see the less part of the card which made me thought i saw cost 3 if you casted a spell last turn but now i realize a 4 mana deal 8 is on and a 1 mana deal 8 is pretty good

I totally agree with you OP.

Sadly, people like to live in an eternal PTR, confusing it with dynamic content release.

People like to be overwhelmed and get bitter at broken stuff, and appreciate the subsequent relievement of nerfs even more.

I'm fairly happy with most buffs, but most nerfs happen on stupidly and obviously broken cards, over and over, as if we players were a bunch of chimps (with all due respect for chimps).

We'll both be downvoted for disagreeing with this policy.

You're 1 patch late dude, DH is not dominant atm, Garrosh took over the leadership for a few weeks now...

Time to craft Shadowjeweler Hanar so I can take him for a free test drive!

All 3 big decks take a nerf, seems fair, especially since these nerves are weakening the stats but not the role of the card, so it seems sensible.

I don't even want to dust the nerfed cards cause I know they still have some use.

In the end we can hope for more tier 1 decks.

Ineteresting.

Balancing a game is extremely hard and time consuming but when you can collect the data from thousands of games that can lead to better data. One reason I really like this kind of balancing personally is it gives leeway for more powerful and interesting things that they would likely never have even tried in the first place out of fear of being unable to balance it. There are Pros and Cons to both ways of doing it but to say this isn't balancing and is just a cash grab is a bit more cynical than the truth of how these things work.

Altruis the Outcast received the wrong Nerf. They should have nerfed it into jsut a board clearer, and not deal face damage. Imo, that "nerf" it received was a slap on the wrists that did nothing to it, other than piss it off.

Here's my two cents regarding the current policy on balance: it sucks. No sugarcoating it, the current design process on Hearthstone sucks.

Back when people would get angry over no changes and broken cards running rampant for months and months on end, there was a clear design policy: try and design cards that were balanced. T5 would sometimes fail on that policy (hello, Undertaker who lived without its nerf for 6 months, for example), but they tried to actually follow a path of balancing cards for the sake of having a balanced game.

Currently, however, the design seems more like "let's make a brutal amount of broken cards and slowly nerf them all so we don't need to try and balance the game and, as a bonus, get that sweet extra money". And the sad part is that people prefer this method, apparently. I mean, why focus money and time on balancing, for example, Priestess of Fury or Skull of Gul'dan and perhaps get criticized for doing it poorly, when you can release it as a clearly broken card, have the criticism anyway and, when you finally work around balancing, you get praised and people give you more money because you "listen to criticism and acted on it". That is not trying to make a competitive and balanced card game, that is us, Hearthstone's playerbase, spending money to do the balancing team's job.

And I know adding one new class means new class interactions that can shift the meta forever and in completely unpredictable ways, but what about the possibility of releasing Demon Hunter as a beta class instead? And you you're wondering how that could be done, it's simple: anyone can try on casual so T5 can still have the numbers on how the class plays out against other archetypes instead of releasing it fully to destroy ranked mode for two months. Hell, if T5 were to do it that way, they would have even more veried numbers, as playing on casual means people are more apt to experiment, giving some insight on how the class works against weaker archetypes like, for example, Heal Druid (yeah, that's something that was pushed by Blizzard for one expansion, remember?). And if they were afraid people wouldn't play in casual because they don't want to play for no rewards, just throw a couple of carrots on a stick like special card backs or unlocking new emotes (they have the "Sorry" emote on hold, at the very least), something that they can do with minimal effort and minimal downside in revenue and actually keep the game competitive without being completely broken.

Not in the mood to go deep on all of these but from a Wild perspective, the DH nerfs are huge and absolutely warranted (especially the Priestess, that card was nowhere near reasonable). The Aldor Attendant buff turns the Buff Paladin deck from an archetype that has potential to I'd say an actual competitor in the meta. I've already had some very surprising success with the deck as is and this just kicks its competitiveness up a notch. The Lurker Below buff is just...wow. The card is already surprisingly good in Quest Shaman and Evolve Shaman (not that those are the top of the meta by any means) and now it's essentially a strictly better Fire Elemental. That's kinda crazy. You'd have to have serious reasons NOT to run the card which...I mean that's kinda overdoing it IMO. If Even Shamans were annoying with their "oops Wrath of Air + Maelstrom Portal", they'll now be packing this. We really don't need autoincludes in the game, and we just got one. Hopefully this won't lead to Shamans of Shamanstone. The rest is not a big deal for Wild but I am kinda bummed by the nerf to Scavenger's Ingenuity. Not sure why that was needed. I've had some decent fun with Dire Frenzy + Master's Call Spell Hunter and now it's weaker.

I'm glad that [Hearthstone Card (Siamat) Not Found] now beat [Hearthstone Card (Priestess of Fury) Not Found]. I think that is already a good change.

You're terribly wrong: 5 damage are much easier to deal than 7.

Plus now it will die to Dragonfire Potion, so I'm quite happy about it.