Didn't I? 53%.

You know I didn't claim there was a unicorn priest, right?

Just a while ago he said Shaman is 25% of the ladder and now he's saying it's 17%

When did I say that? I can crossreference with the data and tell you what the ladder looked like then. Could have been referring to games at Legend or from rank 5 to Legend?

17% is across all ranks. It's a 30% when you just look at Legend.

I do think 50% of players piloting the Pirate package is too high. There is a lot to consider with the meta, and I wanted to give a lot of statistics to help foster a dialog. We see people saying "X Class is 80% of the meta" pretty frequently, and I think it's helpful to have a conversation about what's really going on with some actual data.

We've said in the past that we think the meta has some issues, I just didn't reiterate it here explicitly.

I agree we should add more good tech cards.

I think you're right about the shaman rate increasing during the last day of the season. We are seeing Control Warrior is a significant counter to that in the data. Fibonacci saw significant win-rates for Control Warrior vs Shaman: https://twitter.com/FibonacciHS/status/826663772681035776

Of course, he's a very good player, but even the average win rates vs Shaman are quite good for that deck.

I think these stats are false and the number is significantly higher.

Why do you think the stats are false? We look at every game played and we record the results.

It's certainly possible you are seeing a higher or lower amount. These are average numbers, not a guarantee for any one person's personal experience.

I don't think the problem is out of our hands. I do think the problem has been becoming larger as the community matures and becomes more connected to online communities. More people seem to be flocking to the best decks now than before the advent of popular websites that attempt to catalog 'the best decks'. Information flow is faster. It's a different world now and perhaps that means we need to rethink how we are doing things.

Our private data shows (x), no you can't see it.

You can see it - I put a lot of it directly into the post. I think it's useful to post our data, since other sources of data don't show the whole picture, or are anecdotal. Some folks post things like "X class is 80% of the meta", and even if there is an issue, it makes it harder to discuss the problem. What percentage is too much?

We want to let the meta settle on its own.

This wasn't the point I was attempting to make. More that we would like the meta to change on its own, and that we're willing to make changes when we don't see that happening. So far things have been changing, and we see potential ways it could continue to change, but we aren't 100% happy, and we could see a balance adjustment around the end of the month.

Announcement of an announcement.

I tend to believe that a lot of folks prefer hearing information about what we're thinking and understanding our options and timeframes. I understand that some folks would rather us not say anything until we are ready to make an announcement.

When we say Undertaker Hunter was 25% of the ladder we mean that across all levels of Hearthstone players. What made it even worse was there was an extremely similar deck being played in Warlock that was another 15% of all games. Lately when people mention numbers like 50%, it's from a small sampling of players from an outside source within a very specific skill set (Legend). Players that play in Legend are very important to us of course, but these statistics don't represent the same thing in this circumstance.