Bottled Madness was a pretty awful card in arena. However, +2/+2 is a lot of stats, and the demon climate is different. As a Renounce Darkness enthusiast, I'm thinking small buffs on a full hand of random cards is more than adequate.
Hir'eek might have had more of a chance if he was a demon instead of a beast: then Void Analyst could be used for additional buffs, plus there are some cards that buff demons once they are on the board. Probably still not good enough, but it would at least have encouraged more experimentation.
Glinda was nice in Wild with Molten Giant, but the nerf to echo made that combo less explosive.
I had Da Undatakah in my quest paladin deck for a while, but cut him because an additional deathrattle minion is easier to play and often enough of a threat to win. I do still run Countess Ashmore though.
I played Krag'wa in Malygos Shaman; it allowed me to use my cheap spells for removal without breaking up my win condition. He's also nice in Control Shaman, but I don't enjoy playing a deck that has fatigue as its only win condition. Instead I played a version of Muckmorpher Shaman without the shrine, which had fatigue as a secondary win condition, but Krag'wa didn't fit there.
I've been using the solo adventures (NOT the Practice mode, btw) to level up DH to 24 so far. However I have not had any luck using that method for the last two days now. Not really a big deal since we'll have the full expansion in ~24 hours. Was nice to start the level up "ahead of time" but oh well. Looking forward to tomorrow.
I managed to reach rank 5 in two days and the losses I had didn't stop me from progressing. Now imagine what it would have been if I had started the season with a multiplier of 11. Imagine how I would have been able to reach Legend with a casual deck, cuz I would have gained 2 stars per win. And if I had reached Legend with it, nothing would have stopped me from doing the same thing in the upcoming month. Is this what someone would call competitive ladder?
My problem comes from the height of the multipliers. For me they are by 1 number too high. Losses just don't feel like punishments anymore, rather they feel like mild inconviniences, which imho also destroys the meaning of competitiveness. Reaching rank 5 Diamond for me felt like a straightforward "quest", where the path to the goal was certain. It felt more like a friendly Tavern Brawl rather than a rough arena, so reaching that rank didn't feel special anymore. New players might not consider this to be the case right now, but if they do their best to reach that level, as you said, they could feel it eventually.
I hear you on feeling that losses don't matter when you have a multiplier. In a lot of ways, I think this is a feature (e.g. you can play non-optimized meta decks or tier 2, 3, and 4 decks and still make progress), but it also makes things easier. But the question I have is, what sense of accomplishment did you get out of getting back to rank 5 in the old system? It sounds like you were pretty worn out in October by the grind of it, and I can sympathize a lot with that sense of ladder anxiety when you're close to a goal. The first few times I reached a new ranked floor it felt like an accomplishment, but for me getting back to the Rank 5 - Legend range every season has felt like a chore for a long time - not really an accomplishment so much as an obligation, like I was punching below my weight if let my rank slip.
You ask if I'd call this new system a competitive ladder. I absolutely would, but I think it's competitive in a way that isn't as clear as the old system. The old system was designed to be bottom heavy, and to make it much harder to get to the highest ranks. In that sense, it was a competitive ladder - most players were low on the ladder, some were in the middle, fewer still were in the highest ranks. It looked the way a competitive ladder should look, but as we know, there was a lot of grinding out ranks that didn't really reflect skill growth or competitive ability.
In the new system, there may be nothing stopping you from getting back up to Legend every season with a tier 2 or 3 deck, but it's not really an accomplishment either, and you're not really competing. This new system lets you "hang out" at a rank if you're satisfied with just getting there and stopping. You still have to log in and work your way back there (of course, because Blizzard needs to incentive you to keep playing), but it's no longer hard to just post up at a rank and be done. And that's fine - if you want to bask in your success and just enjoy racking up bonus packs and card backs, go ahead. But if you want to compete, then each season you need to push on to the next rank floor or beyond. And if/when you reach legend, you need to push to increase your legend rank.
At the end of the day, your competitive ranking for the Hearthstone ladder isn't your league/rank pair, it's your MMR. The leagues and ranks are a shiny veneer to make ranking up feel good and to keep you engaged while you're competing for higher MMR. But the MMR is the heart of the competitive game.
Star Aligner obviously, but fortunately Chump is doing a "Star Aligner in Every Class" series to give him a proper farewell.
I actually played Arcanosaur in an elemental mage deck last year; it was an OK card back then. But right now you need something of the caliber of Crazed Netherwing for a clear + body to be playable.
I figured there would be some niche deck that could get value out of Gral, the Shark, but it didn't happen.
Soulwarden is a very strong card in my opinion, but after Doomguard was Hall-of-Famed there wasn't enough of a reason to play Discolock. Even the memers flocked to Plot Twist instead.
I am loving the new system - because 1) it's making the climb less of a grind, 2) the rewards are actually now rewarding enough to make the effort mean something, and 3) most importantly (to me) since it's "more forgiving" I'm seeing so many different, not hyper-refined-tier-1 decks throughout the climb.
The main reason I never played the ladder on the old system was I get so tired of facing the exact same 2 or 3 decks over and over and over, so Casual (GENERALLY) had greater variety and people willing to play fun or interesting decks. At least in the first week I'm not seeing that anymore, even as I get to the "more serious" leagues i.e. played a person yesterday on Gold 2 with a funky High Priestess Jeklik disco/buff deck featuring Deathwing. That's what I like to see and I am here for it.
My experience on point 3) is the exact opposite. I'm a meme player who stubbornly refuses to use decks I know are strong, so used to keep myself at the low-mid ranks (15-10) to better my odds of encountering non-meta decks. Like you this was about variety rather than preying on the weak.
The issue now is that my MMR is actually quite solid, getting 8x multiplier in both Wild and Standard, so I have only encountered the folks who traditionally made their way to rank 5 with meta decks. The frustrating part is that I cannot manipulate it by staying at low ranks any more. Now the system tells me I'm a good player and forces me to play against people who care about climbing the ladder, which is exactly what I was trying to avoid.
I appreciate the additional end of month rewards I get with very little effort because the 8x multiplier makes is easy to reach Platinum 5 with a 30% win rate, but I play HS for the fun of variety not the rewards. So sadly, the new system is even more likely to push me into casual than the old one.
A few people have said that Blizzard should consider adding more stars for higher leagues. I think that point of view shows a bit of "high ranking" blinders. When you're a player who is finding that they're easily climbing the ladder all the way to the top, it's tempting to think that the ladder climb isn't hard enough, and that they should add more stars to create larger gaps in the upper leagues and make players work harder as they get higher up.
I think this is anathema to what they're trying to do with the ladder. The reason so many people hated the old ranking system is because it often felt like the ladder tested your amount of free time more than your skill. Taking myself as an example, I'm someone who has hit Legend in the past, but who rarely had enough time to play back up to Legend rank in any given season because of how long it took to go from Rank 5 to Legend. (It doesn't help that I prefer slower, grindier decks…) And that sense of stagnation on the ladder was amplified if, in a given month, I simply had very little time to play. I'd just end up lower than normal at the start of the next season, stuck wasting my limited play time at lower ranks.
I think the big question to me is "if you're a highly skilled and/or competitive player, why do you even care about the lower leagues?" In this new system, you're going to get to Legend fairly quickly and then your rank will simply be your MMR (which is ultimately a much more precise way to measure your ranking anyway). If you're not at that level yet, the ladder will provide you with an opportunity to make progress month over month until you reach that level.
Taking the 2019 ranked data as a reference, that means something like 6% or 7% of players are going to skyrocket to the top and start using MMR as their benchmark, and the rest are going to have rewarding laddering experiences for the first time in a long time. The ~93% bulk of players are really who the various intermediate leagues were made for.
You've brought up very interesting points and I agree with most of them. Being a fan of control decks myself, I also considered the old rank 5 - Legend grind to be horrendous because of how time-wasting it was. It also caused ladder anxiety and frustration the higher you climbed. I remember how I tried to reach Legend with my previous N'zoth Priest deck a couple of months ago and I even managed to reach Rank 1***** twice or thrice before falling down to rank 5 and losing motivation to continue forward. I also won't deny the fact that newer players won't be able to skyrocket through the leagues like veterans and they will be forced to grind every single star from every single rank from every single league (if we, of course, forget about the win streak bonuses for a second). So, yes, taking into account the things I mentioned above, it's logical to assume that the new ranking system is a huge improvement over the old one and still creates a fair environment for all types of players.
However, I don't agree with the philosophy behind the multiplier. On paper, it's a good idea to have that in the game, since people can reach their previously reached rank quickly and continue from there. However my issue with this feature comes from the fact, that it makes our losses meaningless. A person can breeze through the ranks regardless of the real win-rate of their deck. In order to illustrate what I mean, I would like to give myself as an example. I'm a returning player, I stopped playing constructive hs since October. I got tired of reaching rank 5 for the sweet epic, I got tired of playing 5 games on the ladder just for the card back and I even stopped doing my dailes at one point, so you can imagine how my rank dropped. Last week I decided to give hs another try, I created a fun Reno-Thief Priest deck and jumped on the ladder. This is the current list (though if you check the spoiler, you will see what it used to include initially):
I managed to reach rank 13 before the season ended. Then, on 1. April I had some free time, I wanted to try out the new ladder and get some of that phat loot. My multiplier was 10, when I started. I went from bottom Bronze to bottom Platinum relatively quickly, then losses started to pile up, so I removed the cards I mentioned in the spoiler and used the deck you can see above. With it I continued to rank 5 Platinum and took a break. On the next day I reached rank 5 Diamond and as glad I was for climbing that high and for being able to benefit from an epic at the end of the month, I also felt really disappointed with how easy the ladder was for me. You can say anything about the deck above, but I consider it to be extremely casual - it lacks proper card draw, early game and it features some clunky cards + it's super weak against combo (especially the popular quest mage). Yet, I managed to reach rank 5 in just two days and the losses I had didn't stop me from progressing. Now imagine what it would have been if I had started the season with a multiplier of 11. Imagine how I would have been able to reach Legend with a casual deck, cuz I would have gained 2 stars per win after rank 5 Diamond. And if I had reached Legend with it, nothing would have stopped me from doing the same thing in the upcoming month. Is this what someone would call competitive ladder?
My problem comes from the size of the multipliers. For me they are by 1 number too high. Losses just don't feel like punishments anymore, rather they feel like mild inconviniences, which imho also destroys the meaning of competitiveness. Reaching rank 5 Diamond for me felt like a straightforward "quest", where the path to the goal was certain. It felt more like a friendly Tavern Brawl rather than a rough arena, so reaching that rank didn't feel special anymore. New players might not consider this to be the case right now, but if they do their best to reach that level, as you said, they could feel it eventually.
that cant be right. i play around 90 minutes per day, and always do the expeditions with some success. ive finished with 7 wins around 4 times, and on average i get 3-4 wins. i have 47K shards 75 wild commons 25 wild rares 10 wild epics and 4 wild champions cards. i have every deck available to play or craft for i miss a couple of rares here and there and champions which i dont want to craft until i max out the regions. i have 2 regions maxed out.
Ive also got my most 3 decks nerfed and always changed to something else, not mention i play a variety of decks since the games economy allows me to do so.
ive spent ZERO money and im able to amass this much with little effort and the game has been out for what 2 months and half? im gonna be able to get full collection when the game fully launches by the end of the month.
you can say a million things bad about the game but no way u can say it has a bad economy. its probably the best in that regard.
You wouldnt want to run it, it's likely there simply for the 2 cards that summon random 1 cost minions for your opponent , one is in standard (3/9 taunt), one in wild (dragon)
but if I don't get these, then I'll consider crafting them. I don't usually craft on the first day (only Zephrys the Great and Kronx Dragonhoof ), but this may be an exception because I have a lot of dust.
I agree with shuckie up there that Kayn Sunfury is probably overrated. Its best use is against priest and druid. In most cases, you can accomplish the same thing with Maiev Shadowsong. That's not to say its a bad card and will never see play, I'm just thinking of super safe options assuming youre crafting day 1.
I think Kayn is an auto include just because his stat value. 4-mana 3/5 with charge that goes through taunts is just a great minion even if you don't use him for lethal. You can just use him to value trade through taunts or pick off a specific minion.
There's absolutely no reason not to craft him if one plans to play any DH decks
Kayn Sunfury is really strong, but he's limited by the fact that he's a class legendary and if I'm low on dust he's probably not going to be a card I would want to craft, at least not until hes confirmed by pros as a vital part of the deck. In many ways he's like Dragonbane in dragon hunter. Its really strong in very specific points of matches, but in most cases you can probably still do well without em.
The spell mana mechanic is not perfect but i believe is as balanced as it gets.
VengeanceBADCARDNAME is a great example. 7 mana to kill a single unit is overpriced. I can't think in a single target that Vengeance is casted upon that will end in a favorable trade. Ruination cost just 2 more and its a full board clear. On paper, this card is just terrible. But Vengeance does see competitve play. Why?
For 2 reasons: 1- It has Fast spell speed: Since its only possible to attack every other turn, removing a single big unit from combat is very valuable. But vengeance trully shines when the opponent cast buff/spells on his minions (often burst spells). At that point, Vengeance can become a 2-1 or even a 3-1 trade. 2- Mana pool mechanic: Even having the fast spell speed, holding on 7 mana WITHOUT having acess to the extra pool, would be too easy to play around. The card would also be much less consistent as some targets like Darius/Hecarin can end the game even before Vengeance could hit the board. Without this mechanic, Vengeance will need to cost less to see play, meaning it would be much harder to balance. It either would cost too much and never see play, or cost to little and always see play.
In short, this mechanic gives BAD spell cards a shot to see play in the right circunstances. Without the mana pool mechanic, this game would lose a lot of complex depth and become more or less like a Hearthstone 2.0
There is so much more to talk about the Spell mechanic but i think i said enough for now, this isn't the righ place anyway.
Even though it costs one more and the outcome may backfire, I think Zul'Drak Ritualist is a much better anti-Big Priest tool since it summons three different drops instead of three times the same one.
But yeah, a really small detail as long as it fucks up Anduin's res pool.
Yeah just by looking at it, it does seem pretty slow just a fun day 1 deck. Maybe theres something that can speed it up though.
Also I included Al'ar because I was the unlucky soul to get it in a pack and pretty much every legendary nobody wants...soo I just included it to feel better :/
If I had to build a Griftah deck I would probably play some Warlock list with Demonic Project, Drakkari Trickster and such. But since Gul'dan doesn't have a reliable Control tool like Bloodreaver Gul'dan anymore, it is kind of difficult to survive enough to pull off this strategy. But maybe I'm wrong and I didn't look enough into it, who knows.
Favorite Cards by Rarity
I agree haha. I don't generally care for the Rogue, but I do like me some shuffle shenanigans.
Shadow Council
Bottled Madness was a pretty awful card in arena. However, +2/+2 is a lot of stats, and the demon climate is different. As a Renounce Darkness enthusiast, I'm thinking small buffs on a full hand of random cards is more than adequate.
Rotating Hearthstone Cards That Didn't Get a Chance to Shine - Decklists To Try Before Rotation
Hir'eek might have had more of a chance if he was a demon instead of a beast: then Void Analyst could be used for additional buffs, plus there are some cards that buff demons once they are on the board. Probably still not good enough, but it would at least have encouraged more experimentation.
Rotating Hearthstone Cards That Didn't Get a Chance to Shine - Decklists To Try Before Rotation
That deck might be worth revisiting now that we have Faceless Corruptor.
Rotating Hearthstone Cards That Didn't Get a Chance to Shine - Decklists To Try Before Rotation
Glinda was nice in Wild with Molten Giant, but the nerf to echo made that combo less explosive.
I had Da Undatakah in my quest paladin deck for a while, but cut him because an additional deathrattle minion is easier to play and often enough of a threat to win. I do still run Countess Ashmore though.
I played Krag'wa in Malygos Shaman; it allowed me to use my cheap spells for removal without breaking up my win condition. He's also nice in Control Shaman, but I don't enjoy playing a deck that has fatigue as its only win condition. Instead I played a version of Muckmorpher Shaman without the shrine, which had fatigue as a secondary win condition, but Krag'wa didn't fit there.
Blizzard Lied
I've been using the solo adventures (NOT the Practice mode, btw) to level up DH to 24 so far. However I have not had any luck using that method for the last two days now. Not really a big deal since we'll have the full expansion in ~24 hours. Was nice to start the level up "ahead of time" but oh well. Looking forward to tomorrow.
The new ladder system
I hear you on feeling that losses don't matter when you have a multiplier. In a lot of ways, I think this is a feature (e.g. you can play non-optimized meta decks or tier 2, 3, and 4 decks and still make progress), but it also makes things easier. But the question I have is, what sense of accomplishment did you get out of getting back to rank 5 in the old system? It sounds like you were pretty worn out in October by the grind of it, and I can sympathize a lot with that sense of ladder anxiety when you're close to a goal. The first few times I reached a new ranked floor it felt like an accomplishment, but for me getting back to the Rank 5 - Legend range every season has felt like a chore for a long time - not really an accomplishment so much as an obligation, like I was punching below my weight if let my rank slip.
You ask if I'd call this new system a competitive ladder. I absolutely would, but I think it's competitive in a way that isn't as clear as the old system. The old system was designed to be bottom heavy, and to make it much harder to get to the highest ranks. In that sense, it was a competitive ladder - most players were low on the ladder, some were in the middle, fewer still were in the highest ranks. It looked the way a competitive ladder should look, but as we know, there was a lot of grinding out ranks that didn't really reflect skill growth or competitive ability.
In the new system, there may be nothing stopping you from getting back up to Legend every season with a tier 2 or 3 deck, but it's not really an accomplishment either, and you're not really competing. This new system lets you "hang out" at a rank if you're satisfied with just getting there and stopping. You still have to log in and work your way back there (of course, because Blizzard needs to incentive you to keep playing), but it's no longer hard to just post up at a rank and be done. And that's fine - if you want to bask in your success and just enjoy racking up bonus packs and card backs, go ahead. But if you want to compete, then each season you need to push on to the next rank floor or beyond. And if/when you reach legend, you need to push to increase your legend rank.
At the end of the day, your competitive ranking for the Hearthstone ladder isn't your league/rank pair, it's your MMR. The leagues and ranks are a shiny veneer to make ranking up feel good and to keep you engaged while you're competing for higher MMR. But the MMR is the heart of the competitive game.
Rotating Hearthstone Cards That Didn't Get a Chance to Shine - Decklists To Try Before Rotation
Star Aligner obviously, but fortunately Chump is doing a "Star Aligner in Every Class" series to give him a proper farewell.
I actually played Arcanosaur in an elemental mage deck last year; it was an OK card back then. But right now you need something of the caliber of Crazed Netherwing for a clear + body to be playable.
I figured there would be some niche deck that could get value out of Gral, the Shark, but it didn't happen.
Soulwarden is a very strong card in my opinion, but after Doomguard was Hall-of-Famed there wasn't enough of a reason to play Discolock. Even the memers flocked to Plot Twist instead.
Day 1 crafts?
I suggest to craft only neutral Legendary minions early on. Class Legendary depends too much on the meta.
The new ladder system
My experience on point 3) is the exact opposite. I'm a meme player who stubbornly refuses to use decks I know are strong, so used to keep myself at the low-mid ranks (15-10) to better my odds of encountering non-meta decks. Like you this was about variety rather than preying on the weak.
The issue now is that my MMR is actually quite solid, getting 8x multiplier in both Wild and Standard, so I have only encountered the folks who traditionally made their way to rank 5 with meta decks. The frustrating part is that I cannot manipulate it by staying at low ranks any more. Now the system tells me I'm a good player and forces me to play against people who care about climbing the ladder, which is exactly what I was trying to avoid.
I appreciate the additional end of month rewards I get with very little effort because the 8x multiplier makes is easy to reach Platinum 5 with a 30% win rate, but I play HS for the fun of variety not the rewards. So sadly, the new system is even more likely to push me into casual than the old one.
Hearthstone Arena in Ashes Of Outland - New Rotation and New Cards
I suppose new standard for first couple of months is alright...
The new ladder system
You've brought up very interesting points and I agree with most of them. Being a fan of control decks myself, I also considered the old rank 5 - Legend grind to be horrendous because of how time-wasting it was. It also caused ladder anxiety and frustration the higher you climbed. I remember how I tried to reach Legend with my previous N'zoth Priest deck a couple of months ago and I even managed to reach Rank 1***** twice or thrice before falling down to rank 5 and losing motivation to continue forward. I also won't deny the fact that newer players won't be able to skyrocket through the leagues like veterans and they will be forced to grind every single star from every single rank from every single league (if we, of course, forget about the win streak bonuses for a second). So, yes, taking into account the things I mentioned above, it's logical to assume that the new ranking system is a huge improvement over the old one and still creates a fair environment for all types of players.
However, I don't agree with the philosophy behind the multiplier. On paper, it's a good idea to have that in the game, since people can reach their previously reached rank quickly and continue from there. However my issue with this feature comes from the fact, that it makes our losses meaningless. A person can breeze through the ranks regardless of the real win-rate of their deck. In order to illustrate what I mean, I would like to give myself as an example. I'm a returning player, I stopped playing constructive hs since October. I got tired of reaching rank 5 for the sweet epic, I got tired of playing 5 games on the ladder just for the card back and I even stopped doing my dailes at one point, so you can imagine how my rank dropped. Last week I decided to give hs another try, I created a fun Reno-Thief Priest deck and jumped on the ladder. This is the current list (though if you check the spoiler, you will see what it used to include initially):
Wild · Thief Priest · by Kovachut · 6 years, 6 months ago
I managed to reach rank 13 before the season ended. Then, on 1. April I had some free time, I wanted to try out the new ladder and get some of that phat loot. My multiplier was 10, when I started. I went from bottom Bronze to bottom Platinum relatively quickly, then losses started to pile up, so I removed the cards I mentioned in the spoiler and used the deck you can see above. With it I continued to rank 5 Platinum and took a break. On the next day I reached rank 5 Diamond and as glad I was for climbing that high and for being able to benefit from an epic at the end of the month, I also felt really disappointed with how easy the ladder was for me. You can say anything about the deck above, but I consider it to be extremely casual - it lacks proper card draw, early game and it features some clunky cards + it's super weak against combo (especially the popular quest mage). Yet, I managed to reach rank 5 in just two days and the losses I had didn't stop me from progressing. Now imagine what it would have been if I had started the season with a multiplier of 11. Imagine how I would have been able to reach Legend with a casual deck, cuz I would have gained 2 stars per win after rank 5 Diamond. And if I had reached Legend with it, nothing would have stopped me from doing the same thing in the upcoming month. Is this what someone would call competitive ladder?
My problem comes from the size of the multipliers. For me they are by 1 number too high. Losses just don't feel like punishments anymore, rather they feel like mild inconviniences, which imho also destroys the meaning of competitiveness. Reaching rank 5 Diamond for me felt like a straightforward "quest", where the path to the goal was certain. It felt more like a friendly Tavern Brawl rather than a rough arena, so reaching that rank didn't feel special anymore. New players might not consider this to be the case right now, but if they do their best to reach that level, as you said, they could feel it eventually.
Day 1 crafts?
I’ll craft the Warlock legendaries because I am an idiot, but I really love playing the class. Granted, both look pretty useful this time around.
Our Thoughts on Hearthstone's Ashes of Outland Neutral Cards (Part 1)
The ritualist can ALSO summon that 1/4 guy that you can hit to deal damage to their face :)
Legends of Runeterra Official Launch, Mobile Access and New Card Set on April 30!
that cant be right. i play around 90 minutes per day, and always do the expeditions with some success. ive finished with 7 wins around 4 times, and on average i get 3-4 wins. i have 47K shards 75 wild commons 25 wild rares 10 wild epics and 4 wild champions cards. i have every deck available to play or craft for i miss a couple of rares here and there and champions which i dont want to craft until i max out the regions. i have 2 regions maxed out.
Ive also got my most 3 decks nerfed and always changed to something else, not mention i play a variety of decks since the games economy allows me to do so.
ive spent ZERO money and im able to amass this much with little effort and the game has been out for what 2 months and half? im gonna be able to get full collection when the game fully launches by the end of the month.
you can say a million things bad about the game but no way u can say it has a bad economy. its probably the best in that regard.
New Neutral Minion - Soulbound Ashtongue
You wouldnt want to run it, it's likely there simply for the 2 cards that summon random 1 cost minions for your opponent , one is in standard (3/9 taunt), one in wild (dragon)
Day 1 crafts?
I'm debating crafting a golden legendary for the first time in Zixor, Apex Predator.
Day 1 crafts?
I already opened the bundle and got Astromancer Solarian and Zixor, Apex Predator. I will open another 25 packs and hope to have at least one of these tomorrow:
Maiev Shadowsong
Kayn Sunfury
Shadowjeweler Hanar
Lady Liadrin
Evocation
but if I don't get these, then I'll consider crafting them. I don't usually craft on the first day (only Zephrys the Great and Kronx Dragonhoof ), but this may be an exception because I have a lot of dust.
Blizzard Lied
*****EDIT******
Just saw Almaniarra posted the exact step by step how to, Its exactly what I did.
Day 1 crafts?
Kayn Sunfury is really strong, but he's limited by the fact that he's a class legendary and if I'm low on dust he's probably not going to be a card I would want to craft, at least not until hes confirmed by pros as a vital part of the deck. In many ways he's like Dragonbane in dragon hunter. Its really strong in very specific points of matches, but in most cases you can probably still do well without em.
Ruination is broken and can't be fixed.
Now that i've read the entire thread, DoubleSummon and meisterz39 advices are solid.
The spell mana mechanic is not perfect but i believe is as balanced as it gets.
VengeanceBADCARDNAME is a great example.
7 mana to kill a single unit is overpriced. I can't think in a single target that Vengeance is casted upon that will end in a favorable trade. Ruination cost just 2 more and its a full board clear. On paper, this card is just terrible. But Vengeance does see competitve play. Why?
For 2 reasons:
1- It has Fast spell speed:
Since its only possible to attack every other turn, removing a single big unit from combat is very valuable.
But vengeance trully shines when the opponent cast buff/spells on his minions (often burst spells).
At that point, Vengeance can become a 2-1 or even a 3-1 trade.
2- Mana pool mechanic:
Even having the fast spell speed, holding on 7 mana WITHOUT having acess to the extra pool, would be too easy to play around. The card would also be much less consistent as some targets like Darius/Hecarin can end the game even before Vengeance could hit the board. Without this mechanic, Vengeance will need to cost less to see play, meaning it would be much harder to balance. It either would cost too much and never see play, or cost to little and always see play.
In short, this mechanic gives BAD spell cards a shot to see play in the right circunstances.
Without the mana pool mechanic, this game would lose a lot of complex depth and become more or less like a Hearthstone 2.0
There is so much more to talk about the Spell mechanic but i think i said enough for now, this isn't the righ place anyway.
Our Thoughts on Hearthstone's Ashes of Outland Neutral Cards (Part 1)
Agreed, if Rez Priest continues to be a thing, I might be tempted to run one of these in some lists.
Our Thoughts on Hearthstone's Ashes of Outland Neutral Cards (Part 1)
Even though it costs one more and the outcome may backfire, I think Zul'Drak Ritualist is a much better anti-Big Priest tool since it summons three different drops instead of three times the same one.
But yeah, a really small detail as long as it fucks up Anduin's res pool.
Libram Quest Paladin
Yeah just by looking at it, it does seem pretty slow just a fun day 1 deck. Maybe theres something that can speed it up though.
Also I included Al'ar because I was the unlucky soul to get it in a pack and pretty much every legendary nobody wants...soo I just included it to feel better :/
Rotating Hearthstone Cards That Didn't Get a Chance to Shine - Decklists To Try Before Rotation
Since I wanted to showcase 9 decks I preferred to highlight class cards, with some exceptions of course.
Griftah is a neutral and didn't really fit in any deckbuilding idea I came up with for the article.
If you're interested, other honorable mentions that didn't make it are Loose Specimen, Countess Ashmore (I'm so sad), Arcane Dynamo, Arena Fanatic and Snapjaw Shellfighter.
If I had to build a Griftah deck I would probably play some Warlock list with Demonic Project, Drakkari Trickster and such. But since Gul'dan doesn't have a reliable Control tool like Bloodreaver Gul'dan anymore, it is kind of difficult to survive enough to pull off this strategy. But maybe I'm wrong and I didn't look enough into it, who knows.