"Deal 4 damage to a unit. If that unit dies, deal excess damage to the enemy Nexus"
Sorry if this sounds nitpicky, but I'd like to point out that "If that unit dies" is a problematic way of wording it; after all, the excess damage applies to the nexus in full if the unit is removed (e.g. recalled) by other means before Final Spark resolves.
DoubleSummon is right though. Fiora’s spot in this deck is similar to her place in the old elusive deck. She’s a 3/3 challenger that can straight up win the game and has synergy with our deck. She’s a champion, but that doesn’t necessarily mean she’s the primary focus of the deck.
She’s a strong card and obviously a win con of the deck. DoubleSummons point, I think, is that Fiora’s not essential to winning as suggested in the post. Essentially, she is the alternate win con. The deck intends to drop early minions and oppressively control the board from there with buffs. I think it’s actually quite comparable to a zoo type deck.
We don't need any HS2: they can simply overhaul the game internally, if they really want to.
Game X is/was a design policy that is made redundant with the regular release of expansions: you release a new game only after you've stopped expanding the old one for a while.
I guess I'm in favor of making Relentless Pursuit a slow-speed spell. Honestly, I'm not sure a mana-cost increase is warranted; the card is pretty underwhelming in many scenarios. It only shines as a 'win-more' button if you've already got a heavy board advantage or if you control units that can't be blocked (circling back to the Elusive and Fearsome dilemma).
I'm with Sanns: The card seems pretty underwhelming with its printed text. Letting Unstable Voltician trigger his effect after being summoned should make him more viable.
What I am saying is that Neonangel said that you are in a lot of trouble if they kill fiora, but this deck doesn't seem to rely on her as much as a pure Fiora deck.
I realy don't get why so many players want to see Divine Spirit to go to the Hall of Fame. I mean i haven't seen that card in play for almost a year now .... at least not since the release of DoD - so i do not see a problem - or am i missing something?
Simply because of future cards and what this card would do? maybe i'm a little sentimental about that card because Priest was my first golden Hero and is my favourite class and maybe that's why i do not see this as a problem.
So far i have no idea which card should be Hof`D ... maybe Backstab - i have to think about that a little :)
There is been a lot of hype since the Hearthstone Summit and I am looking forward to them revealing what they are planning. Just have a few comments on some of the hype. First, this idea of a Hearthstone 2.0. If they do one then they better transfer all cards to the new one because the will lose a lot of players if they do not. I for one will not start collecting all over again after spending 6 years on my current collection. Should be no problem transferring cards because after all what does 2.0 meant to a card game? Really it is just like an expansion, so current cards should be included. Second, they seem to be putting a lot of resources into Battlegrounds. Even though I am not a big fan or a regular player of Battlegrounds, I will not knock it or suggest that they should not support this mode because clearly it has a following. What I will say is that I do not see the source of revenue produced from this mode for Blizzard. Basically, revenue comes from packs and packs have no value for Battlegrounds. So clearly Blizzard is going to have to find a way to increase their revenue through packs in order to support Battlegrounds. How they intend to do this is what is peaking my interest.
I think if they would make some sort of New Hearthstone like Hearthstone 2.0 that they will simply do that via update - because like you said if they would make a new game with all new cards etc they would loose a lot of players.
So far im hyped because there we're some infos and interviews that sounded exciting - some questions about a new Identity for Paladin, Mage will be bonkers etc
I also think it`s ok if they give a lot of resources to Battlegrounds because the mode has found lots of love from the community - but that does not mean that they will only do new things for BG and nothing else.
So, like i said - i'm hyped about the upcoming expansion/changes/rotation etc :)
Currently you need to open 30 packs from the most recent expansion to get all of the perks of the battlegrounds beta. Thats not very hard to do being f2p at all. Maybe they will add more perks for higher amount of packs purchased.
This might be one of those years we dont see any cards being HoF. The meta is healthy, and there's no card that truly deserves the boot to wild.
A few arguments against some entries some have entered;
- Edwin VanCleef - Its an all or nothing card for rogue. Its not played easily without risks, and is always under threat of silences and saps. I just dont think its ever an insurmountable problem. It may occasionally be a cheap win, but only if you get the best hand for it, and I think its generally agreed that if you get the best hand possible, you are in a good position to win anyway.
When it comes to VanCleef, I don't have any problem with him mechanics wise, but the problem lies in how many Rogue decks he is used in and the fact that he is part of the Evergreen set. Just look at HSReplay... at this moment as I'm typing, he is in 15.9% of decks, which makes him the 10th most popular legendary card at this time. The next highest Classic class Legendary is Cenarius in 2.5% of decks. And before Quest Druid came along in SoU, when was the last time you saw Cenarius getting used? None of the other Classic set Class Legendaries are above 1.0% representation. The Classic Class Legendary cards are supposed to be situational at best, popping up in the meta every now and then. When it comes to Edwin VanCleef, he's become a staple that just gets put into almost any Rogue deck. I feel Edwin VanCleef goes against their philosophy for the power level that they want the Classic set to be, thus I think it's time for him to get sent to the HoF to freshen up Rogues in standard.
I don't say this lightly, I love Edwin VanCleef, and I will miss him and still play the shit out of him in Wild, but I really think it's time for something different.
Eviscerate and Backstab would probably get the kick if we follow that line of logic. Nearly every deck plays those cards, but we're not seeing much calls for them to be booted.
Its not about removing Vancleef. Its about whats going to replace him and how will that fare in wild. There's just about a place for Edwin VanCleef in nearly very deck, not much for both him and Edmund Cleefvan.
Calls for HoF should, in my opinion, be more than just change for the sake of variety, or for its own sake.
This might be one of those years we dont see any cards being HoF. The meta is healthy, and there's no card that truly deserves the boot to wild.
A few arguments against some entries some have entered;
- Edwin VanCleef - Its an all or nothing card for rogue. Its not played easily without risks, and is always under threat of silences and saps. I just dont think its ever an insurmountable problem. It may occasionally be a cheap win, but only if you get the best hand for it, and I think its generally agreed that if you get the best hand possible, you are in a good position to win anyway.
When it comes to VanCleef, I don't have any problem with him mechanics wise, but the problem lies in how many Rogue decks he is used in and the fact that he is part of the Evergreen set. Just look at HSReplay... at this moment as I'm typing, he is in 15.9% of decks, which makes him the 10th most popular legendary card at this time. The next highest Classic class Legendary is Cenarius in 2.5% of decks. And before Quest Druid came along in SoU, when was the last time you saw Cenarius getting used? None of the other Classic set Class Legendaries are above 1.0% representation. The Classic Class Legendary cards are supposed to be situational at best, popping up in the meta every now and then. When it comes to Edwin VanCleef, he's become a staple that just gets put into almost any Rogue deck. I feel Edwin VanCleef goes against their philosophy for the power level that they want the Classic set to be, thus I think it's time for him to get sent to the HoF to freshen up Rogues in standard.
I don't say this lightly, I love Edwin VanCleef, and I will miss him and still play the shit out of him in Wild, but I really think it's time for something different.
That EVIL classes got more hype for their cards should be a given, considering that the explorers weren't even featured in RoS. Also it doesnt help that the most hyped of all the cards is Galakrond, a hero card, which is only provided to EVIL classes, with only The Amazing Reno being available only to mage. So I think we are in agreement that EVIL got the more exciting cards throughout the year. But this does not necessarily translate to having more fun:-
- Galakrond decks are amazingly predictable, and because of the necessity of including invoke cards and invoke-support cards, this reduces creativity in deck building. Its also not really all that fun to face against. Against rogue, always play around Seal Fate turn 3, against warrior always be vary of Ritual Chopper, etc. Its standard, and boring, in many ways, both to play and played against.
- Lackeys are not really class restricted. There's always EVIL Cable Rat and Grand Lackey Erkh if you're really keen on the card. Also, lets be honest, only shaman and rogue uses lackeys. Its nearly missing in both warrior and priest, and despite being pushed, lackey warlock never was a thing.
- Of all the EVIL classes, I think only quest shaman as a high claim for being genuinely interesting and good at the same time. The quests for warlock, warrior and rogue is generally meh. And quest priest is good on paper but brought down to earth by the priest class being a joke this year. By contrast, quest druid and quest hunter is astonishingly fun, and because of how its structured, is not a rail road of familiar cards from turn to turn neither.
- On the singleton issue. Zephrys the Great is the kind of card that should not under any circumstances be class restricted. Its the sole reason for any class to try highlander to begin with and promotes deck building
Just to conclude, I've had plenty of fun with the EVIL classes this year (aggro bomb warrior, quest tempo priest, quest shaman, galakrond rogue, quest warlock, plot twist warlock etc.) but I think I've have had more fun with the explorer classes, if only because its more challenging to build and win with those decks (beast hunter, quest paladin, quest hunter, quest druid, quest mage, secret quest mage, giants mage, mech highlander hunter, secret hunter, Lucentbark druid, etc.). I wouldn't call Year of the dragon an astoundingly fun year, but its been healthier and more diverse than any other year I can think of in hearthstone.
Its not easy to design cards to be fun and good at the same time. But I dont really feel that blizzard has let 4 out of 9 classes down. The only class to be put on that pedestal is priest, but priest and shaman are special classes where they are either too OP or too down in the dog turdlings to consider.
Currently you need to open 30 packs from the most recent expansion to get all of the perks of the battlegrounds beta. Thats not very hard to do being f2p at all. Maybe they will add more perks for higher amount of packs purchased.
I don't think we are going to be seeing anything on the level of a "Hearthstone 2.0". Honestly the UI is overall solid, and any improvements could easily be implemented without a whole "Hearthstone 2.0" rebranding. Hearthstone isn't a dying game (contrary to what some people say), it is the leading CCG, everyone else is trying to de-throne it. So there is really no need at this point for a 2.0 rebranding.
I know this idea comes from Heroes of the Storm 2.0, which was honestly Blizzard's last ditch effort to save that game. Hearthstone isn't in need of that. Any rebranding is already done every HS year with the themes, and 3 times a year with each expansion.
TL;DR - I wouldn't worry about losing your collection.
As for your second thoughts about Battlegrounds, it will be interesting to see how/if they monetize Battlegrounds. I'm assuming they are keeping track of how many new players are being drawn in because of battlegrounds, and if those new battlerground players are then trying out the rest of the game. They already have small perks built into battlegrounds for opening DoD packs. I'm assuming they will continue to do stuff like that to encourage the battleground players to venture into the constructed/collection building side of the game.
There is been a lot of hype since the Hearthstone Summit and I am looking forward to them revealing what they are planning. Just have a few comments on some of the hype. First, this idea of a Hearthstone 2.0. If they do one then they better transfer all cards to the new one because the will lose a lot of players if they do not. I for one will not start collecting all over again after spending 6 years on my current collection. Should be no problem transferring cards because after all what does 2.0 meant to a card game? Really it is just like an expansion, so current cards should be included. Second, they seem to be putting a lot of resources into Battlegrounds. Even though I am not a big fan or a regular player of Battlegrounds, I will not knock it or suggest that they should not support this mode because clearly it has a following. What I will say is that I do not see the source of revenue produced from this mode for Blizzard. Basically, revenue comes from packs and packs have no value for Battlegrounds. So clearly Blizzard is going to have to find a way to increase their revenue through packs in order to support Battlegrounds. How they intend to do this is what is peaking my interest.
Gadgetzan was a failure of an expansion in my opinion, and I would not want to see anything Gadgetzan related or Tri-class related again. There are soooo many other towns they could do new unique expansions of before ever having to think about revisiting Gadgetzan.
Also, Gadgetzan meta is one of my top 3 least favorite metas of all time in HS history. MSoG Jade Druid and Pirate Warrior are two decks that I can feel the anger boiling under my skin when I think about. I came very close to quitting the game during that xpac. Ungoro saved the game from that terrible expansion.
But I respect your opinion and desire for more Gadgetzan. That's one great thing about this game, each expansion doesn't have to cater to all players. The expansions have had enough variety in them, that just about everyone can find an expansion that has a flavor they love. Just voicing my own opinion on Gadgetzan as I assume there are others who would agree.
This might be one of those years we dont see any cards being HoF. The meta is healthy, and there's no card that truly deserves the boot to wild.
A few arguments against some entries some have entered;
- Malygos - I think theres an interview done somewhere 1 year back that the reason Malygos didn't get HoF is because the devs believe it allows for creative deck building. Also, the card is hardly broken. It usually requires cheating out to work, and so far the only classes that does this to any consistent degree is rogue and druid. Both are not using Malygos in tier 1-3 now.
- Leeroy Jenkins - We had a forum post on this previously. I reiterate my opinion that Leeroy is too powerful for aggro to lose as a resource, without any significant replacement which will likely just be as problematic. Much better to simply print better taunt minions to counter too many Leeroys than remove it.
- Divine Spirit - I don't like this card, but at the same time priest classic/basic cards are generally crap enough that I dont like the idea of this being HoF neither. A nerf to mana may be a better choice. But if theres going to be a candidate this would be the most likely to be it.
- Edwin VanCleef - Its an all or nothing card for rogue. Its not played easily without risks, and is always under threat of silences and saps. I just dont think its ever an insurmountable problem. It may occasionally be a cheap win, but only if you get the best hand for it, and I think its generally agreed that if you get the best hand possible, you are in a good position to win anyway.
- Mind Control Tech - Hate this card. But lets be honest, its not going to ever be nerfed or removed. Its just too situational. And the going argument is if youre playing right into it then that's less to do with RNG than choice.
- Northshire Cleric - The last unnerfed 1/3 thats arguable the best priest card at the moment. Its be touted before, but I think the devs had said at some point that they think cleric is still within acceptable boundaries.
I think there's a real problem here with respect to the Overwhelm keyword. It's clearly intended to match the Trample keyword in MTG,
That's actually a pretty big assumption, considering how many other aspects of the game fail to map exactly to their Magic or Hearthstone counterparts. Maybe it's better to just let Runeterra be Runeterra and discard expectations that are based on other games.
In the end, once you know how Final Spark works, you're not likely to forget it, so maybe this isn't a great hill to die on? I don't think we're likely to see a lot of Overwhelm spells in the future, so it's probably a moot point.
Elder Scrolls Legends has a legendary that gives spells Breakthrough (same thing as Overwhelm/Trample), but they don't have a spell stack so we can't really compare.
They blew up all their cool villains! And maybe the League of Explorers as well!
Let's see what this year's storyline has in store for the players
(I'm always hoping for more Gadgetzan)
I don't think anyone actually got blown up.
In my mind, Hearthstone is a place to tell stories. The expansions are each just a story. This means everything that happens in HS is not canon in WoW.
Look at Gadgetzan for example. Gadgetzan in WoW is NOTHING like Gadgetzan in HS. The whole idea of that expansion, was imagining Gadgetzan years later, and how the city would develop. This is not canon to the WoW universe. You can still go to Gadgetzan in WoW, and it is still just a few huts and goblins, instead of a crime filled metropolis that HS made it out to be.
Sure HS has had it's effect on the WoW lore. Tortollans and even the League of Explorers all exist in WoW now because they were well received in HS.
But I think it's safe to say, that none of the characters that were "blown up" at the end are actually dead. Furthermore, the story ends with 2 different endings (Explorers and EVIL), it would be impossible to make the story canon to the WoW universe with 2 separate endings. The fact that there are 2 endings to this story, further proves that the stories told in HS are just that... stories.
Also look at the Galakronds Awakening trailer. Rafaam and Reno are doing a puppet show trying to tell how their story ends. Would make no sense for this entire trailer to occur if everything that happened in the story was actually happening.
What implications does this have on Reno being a Dragon? That is up to Blizzard to decide what to do now. They could decide to make this canon, and write in Reno as a Dragon Aspect in the WoW universe. Or, they can simply ignore it and chalk it up to Reno having a big imagination and telling a fun story!
Personally, I think HS is better if they are just stories and not canon to the WoW universe. This allows the HS team to just focus on telling a good story, instead of worrying about if it matches up with WoW lore. Trying to keep WoW lore straight has already turned into a mess for WoW, and severely limits the storytelling they are able to do in WoW now days. I say, don't let HS fall into that same trap.
That being said, they totally need to write in Reno as a Dragon Aspect into the WoW lore. That needs to be real and not just made up for a good story.
And to wrap back around to your point now that I've finished my rant... the league of EVIL and LoE could very well make a return to HS one day. They weren't actually blown up, it was just a story. And our favorite villians and heroes could easily return to tell us another story some day.
Is Final Spark / Karma interactions intended?
Sorry if this sounds nitpicky, but I'd like to point out that "If that unit dies" is a problematic way of wording it; after all, the excess damage applies to the nexus in full if the unit is removed (e.g. recalled) by other means before Final Spark resolves.
In general, however, I think your idea is sound.
Hearthstone's New Year May Have Been Leaked - Year of the Phoenix?
that's worst song i've ever heard
Hearthstone Battlegrounds Patch 16.4.1 Coming this Thursday - Queen Wagtoggle Returns Alongside 5 Bug Fixes
Yup, they updated them, but didn't say anything in the patch notes.
Alanzq Offers an Alternative to Elusive or Fearsome Decks With This Hidden Gem Featuring Fiora, Shen, and a Load of Barriers
DoubleSummon is right though. Fiora’s spot in this deck is similar to her place in the old elusive deck. She’s a 3/3 challenger that can straight up win the game and has synergy with our deck. She’s a champion, but that doesn’t necessarily mean she’s the primary focus of the deck.
She’s a strong card and obviously a win con of the deck. DoubleSummons point, I think, is that Fiora’s not essential to winning as suggested in the post. Essentially, she is the alternate win con. The deck intends to drop early minions and oppressively control the board from there with buffs. I think it’s actually quite comparable to a zoo type deck.
Future Plans hype?
We don't need any HS2: they can simply overhaul the game internally, if they really want to.
Game X is/was a design policy that is made redundant with the regular release of expansions: you release a new game only after you've stopped expanding the old one for a while.
Elusive units still a problem - Relentless Persuit is too cheap
I guess I'm in favor of making Relentless Pursuit a slow-speed spell. Honestly, I'm not sure a mana-cost increase is warranted; the card is pretty underwhelming in many scenarios. It only shines as a 'win-more' button if you've already got a heavy board advantage or if you control units that can't be blocked (circling back to the Elusive and Fearsome dilemma).
2020 Hall of Fame Predictions
They won't need any HoF this time if they are actually going to overhaul the Evergreen set.
More unclear wording
I'm with Sanns: The card seems pretty underwhelming with its printed text. Letting Unstable Voltician trigger his effect after being summoned should make him more viable.
Alanzq Offers an Alternative to Elusive or Fearsome Decks With This Hidden Gem Featuring Fiora, Shen, and a Load of Barriers
What I am saying is that Neonangel said that you are in a lot of trouble if they kill fiora, but this deck doesn't seem to rely on her as much as a pure Fiora deck.
Future Plans hype?
If mage is going to be even more bonkers (even when Galaxy spell gets rotated...my all time favorite) then I will be very happy indeed.
2020 Hall of Fame Predictions
I realy don't get why so many players want to see Divine Spirit to go to the Hall of Fame. I mean i haven't seen that card in play for almost a year now .... at least not since the release of DoD - so i do not see a problem - or am i missing something?
Simply because of future cards and what this card would do? maybe i'm a little sentimental about that card because Priest was my first golden Hero and is my favourite class and maybe that's why i do not see this as a problem.
So far i have no idea which card should be Hof`D ... maybe Backstab - i have to think about that a little :)
Future Plans hype?
I think if they would make some sort of New Hearthstone like Hearthstone 2.0 that they will simply do that via update - because like you said if they would make a new game with all new cards etc they would loose a lot of players.
So far im hyped because there we're some infos and interviews that sounded exciting - some questions about a new Identity for Paladin, Mage will be bonkers etc
I also think it`s ok if they give a lot of resources to Battlegrounds because the mode has found lots of love from the community - but that does not mean that they will only do new things for BG and nothing else.
So, like i said - i'm hyped about the upcoming expansion/changes/rotation etc :)
Future Plans hype?
isnt it 20 packs?
2020 Hall of Fame Predictions
From hsreplay the highest classic/basic card represented for rogue is Backstab, followed by Eviscerate, Shadowstep, and Sap
Eviscerate and Backstab would probably get the kick if we follow that line of logic. Nearly every deck plays those cards, but we're not seeing much calls for them to be booted.
Its not about removing Vancleef. Its about whats going to replace him and how will that fare in wild. There's just about a place for Edwin VanCleef in nearly very deck, not much for both him and Edmund Cleefvan.
Calls for HoF should, in my opinion, be more than just change for the sake of variety, or for its own sake.
2020 Hall of Fame Predictions
When it comes to VanCleef, I don't have any problem with him mechanics wise, but the problem lies in how many Rogue decks he is used in and the fact that he is part of the Evergreen set. Just look at HSReplay... at this moment as I'm typing, he is in 15.9% of decks, which makes him the 10th most popular legendary card at this time. The next highest Classic class Legendary is Cenarius in 2.5% of decks. And before Quest Druid came along in SoU, when was the last time you saw Cenarius getting used? None of the other Classic set Class Legendaries are above 1.0% representation. The Classic Class Legendary cards are supposed to be situational at best, popping up in the meta every now and then. When it comes to Edwin VanCleef, he's become a staple that just gets put into almost any Rogue deck. I feel Edwin VanCleef goes against their philosophy for the power level that they want the Classic set to be, thus I think it's time for him to get sent to the HoF to freshen up Rogues in standard.
I don't say this lightly, I love Edwin VanCleef, and I will miss him and still play the shit out of him in Wild, but I really think it's time for something different.
The Year of the Dragon Problem - An Opinion Piece
Just a few points on your article;
That EVIL classes got more hype for their cards should be a given, considering that the explorers weren't even featured in RoS. Also it doesnt help that the most hyped of all the cards is Galakrond, a hero card, which is only provided to EVIL classes, with only The Amazing Reno being available only to mage. So I think we are in agreement that EVIL got the more exciting cards throughout the year. But this does not necessarily translate to having more fun:-
- Galakrond decks are amazingly predictable, and because of the necessity of including invoke cards and invoke-support cards, this reduces creativity in deck building. Its also not really all that fun to face against. Against rogue, always play around Seal Fate turn 3, against warrior always be vary of Ritual Chopper, etc. Its standard, and boring, in many ways, both to play and played against.
- Lackeys are not really class restricted. There's always EVIL Cable Rat and Grand Lackey Erkh if you're really keen on the card. Also, lets be honest, only shaman and rogue uses lackeys. Its nearly missing in both warrior and priest, and despite being pushed, lackey warlock never was a thing.
- Of all the EVIL classes, I think only quest shaman as a high claim for being genuinely interesting and good at the same time. The quests for warlock, warrior and rogue is generally meh. And quest priest is good on paper but brought down to earth by the priest class being a joke this year. By contrast, quest druid and quest hunter is astonishingly fun, and because of how its structured, is not a rail road of familiar cards from turn to turn neither.
- On the singleton issue. Zephrys the Great is the kind of card that should not under any circumstances be class restricted. Its the sole reason for any class to try highlander to begin with and promotes deck building
Just to conclude, I've had plenty of fun with the EVIL classes this year (aggro bomb warrior, quest tempo priest, quest shaman, galakrond rogue, quest warlock, plot twist warlock etc.) but I think I've have had more fun with the explorer classes, if only because its more challenging to build and win with those decks (beast hunter, quest paladin, quest hunter, quest druid, quest mage, secret quest mage, giants mage, mech highlander hunter, secret hunter, Lucentbark druid, etc.). I wouldn't call Year of the dragon an astoundingly fun year, but its been healthier and more diverse than any other year I can think of in hearthstone.
Its not easy to design cards to be fun and good at the same time. But I dont really feel that blizzard has let 4 out of 9 classes down. The only class to be put on that pedestal is priest, but priest and shaman are special classes where they are either too OP or too down in the dog turdlings to consider.
2020 Hall of Fame Predictions
Attendees of the summit have stated that they have seen the HOF cards already. So it sure sounds like its a done deal.
Future Plans hype?
Currently you need to open 30 packs from the most recent expansion to get all of the perks of the battlegrounds beta. Thats not very hard to do being f2p at all. Maybe they will add more perks for higher amount of packs purchased.
Future Plans hype?
I don't think we are going to be seeing anything on the level of a "Hearthstone 2.0". Honestly the UI is overall solid, and any improvements could easily be implemented without a whole "Hearthstone 2.0" rebranding. Hearthstone isn't a dying game (contrary to what some people say), it is the leading CCG, everyone else is trying to de-throne it. So there is really no need at this point for a 2.0 rebranding.
I know this idea comes from Heroes of the Storm 2.0, which was honestly Blizzard's last ditch effort to save that game. Hearthstone isn't in need of that. Any rebranding is already done every HS year with the themes, and 3 times a year with each expansion.
TL;DR - I wouldn't worry about losing your collection.
As for your second thoughts about Battlegrounds, it will be interesting to see how/if they monetize Battlegrounds. I'm assuming they are keeping track of how many new players are being drawn in because of battlegrounds, and if those new battlerground players are then trying out the rest of the game. They already have small perks built into battlegrounds for opening DoD packs. I'm assuming they will continue to do stuff like that to encourage the battleground players to venture into the constructed/collection building side of the game.
The Hearthstone 6th Birthday Celebration has Begun! Login for the Year of the Dragon Card Back, Free Packs, and Great Quests
Didn’t like, dr boom survive too? Could’ve sworn at least one of them survived
Future Plans hype?
There is been a lot of hype since the Hearthstone Summit and I am looking forward to them revealing what they are planning. Just have a few comments on some of the hype. First, this idea of a Hearthstone 2.0. If they do one then they better transfer all cards to the new one because the will lose a lot of players if they do not. I for one will not start collecting all over again after spending 6 years on my current collection. Should be no problem transferring cards because after all what does 2.0 meant to a card game? Really it is just like an expansion, so current cards should be included. Second, they seem to be putting a lot of resources into Battlegrounds. Even though I am not a big fan or a regular player of Battlegrounds, I will not knock it or suggest that they should not support this mode because clearly it has a following. What I will say is that I do not see the source of revenue produced from this mode for Blizzard. Basically, revenue comes from packs and packs have no value for Battlegrounds. So clearly Blizzard is going to have to find a way to increase their revenue through packs in order to support Battlegrounds. How they intend to do this is what is peaking my interest.
The Hearthstone 6th Birthday Celebration has Begun! Login for the Year of the Dragon Card Back, Free Packs, and Great Quests
Gadgetzan was a failure of an expansion in my opinion, and I would not want to see anything Gadgetzan related or Tri-class related again. There are soooo many other towns they could do new unique expansions of before ever having to think about revisiting Gadgetzan.
Also, Gadgetzan meta is one of my top 3 least favorite metas of all time in HS history. MSoG Jade Druid and Pirate Warrior are two decks that I can feel the anger boiling under my skin when I think about. I came very close to quitting the game during that xpac. Ungoro saved the game from that terrible expansion.
But I respect your opinion and desire for more Gadgetzan. That's one great thing about this game, each expansion doesn't have to cater to all players. The expansions have had enough variety in them, that just about everyone can find an expansion that has a flavor they love. Just voicing my own opinion on Gadgetzan as I assume there are others who would agree.
2020 Hall of Fame Predictions
This might be one of those years we dont see any cards being HoF. The meta is healthy, and there's no card that truly deserves the boot to wild.
A few arguments against some entries some have entered;
- Malygos - I think theres an interview done somewhere 1 year back that the reason Malygos didn't get HoF is because the devs believe it allows for creative deck building. Also, the card is hardly broken. It usually requires cheating out to work, and so far the only classes that does this to any consistent degree is rogue and druid. Both are not using Malygos in tier 1-3 now.
- Leeroy Jenkins - We had a forum post on this previously. I reiterate my opinion that Leeroy is too powerful for aggro to lose as a resource, without any significant replacement which will likely just be as problematic. Much better to simply print better taunt minions to counter too many Leeroys than remove it.
- Divine Spirit - I don't like this card, but at the same time priest classic/basic cards are generally crap enough that I dont like the idea of this being HoF neither. A nerf to mana may be a better choice. But if theres going to be a candidate this would be the most likely to be it.
- Edwin VanCleef - Its an all or nothing card for rogue. Its not played easily without risks, and is always under threat of silences and saps. I just dont think its ever an insurmountable problem. It may occasionally be a cheap win, but only if you get the best hand for it, and I think its generally agreed that if you get the best hand possible, you are in a good position to win anyway.
- Mind Control Tech - Hate this card. But lets be honest, its not going to ever be nerfed or removed. Its just too situational. And the going argument is if youre playing right into it then that's less to do with RNG than choice.
- Northshire Cleric - The last unnerfed 1/3 thats arguable the best priest card at the moment. Its be touted before, but I think the devs had said at some point that they think cleric is still within acceptable boundaries.
Is Final Spark / Karma interactions intended?
Elder Scrolls Legends has a legendary that gives spells Breakthrough (same thing as Overwhelm/Trample), but they don't have a spell stack so we can't really compare.
The Hearthstone 6th Birthday Celebration has Begun! Login for the Year of the Dragon Card Back, Free Packs, and Great Quests
I don't think anyone actually got blown up.
In my mind, Hearthstone is a place to tell stories. The expansions are each just a story. This means everything that happens in HS is not canon in WoW.
Look at Gadgetzan for example. Gadgetzan in WoW is NOTHING like Gadgetzan in HS. The whole idea of that expansion, was imagining Gadgetzan years later, and how the city would develop. This is not canon to the WoW universe. You can still go to Gadgetzan in WoW, and it is still just a few huts and goblins, instead of a crime filled metropolis that HS made it out to be.
Sure HS has had it's effect on the WoW lore. Tortollans and even the League of Explorers all exist in WoW now because they were well received in HS.
But I think it's safe to say, that none of the characters that were "blown up" at the end are actually dead. Furthermore, the story ends with 2 different endings (Explorers and EVIL), it would be impossible to make the story canon to the WoW universe with 2 separate endings. The fact that there are 2 endings to this story, further proves that the stories told in HS are just that... stories.
Also look at the Galakronds Awakening trailer. Rafaam and Reno are doing a puppet show trying to tell how their story ends. Would make no sense for this entire trailer to occur if everything that happened in the story was actually happening.
What implications does this have on Reno being a Dragon? That is up to Blizzard to decide what to do now. They could decide to make this canon, and write in Reno as a Dragon Aspect in the WoW universe. Or, they can simply ignore it and chalk it up to Reno having a big imagination and telling a fun story!
Personally, I think HS is better if they are just stories and not canon to the WoW universe. This allows the HS team to just focus on telling a good story, instead of worrying about if it matches up with WoW lore. Trying to keep WoW lore straight has already turned into a mess for WoW, and severely limits the storytelling they are able to do in WoW now days. I say, don't let HS fall into that same trap.
That being said, they totally need to write in Reno as a Dragon Aspect into the WoW lore. That needs to be real and not just made up for a good story.
And to wrap back around to your point now that I've finished my rant... the league of EVIL and LoE could very well make a return to HS one day. They weren't actually blown up, it was just a story. And our favorite villians and heroes could easily return to tell us another story some day.