You don't have to like it, but it's not "broken" in the strictest sense. The effect is an aura rather than a buff - Killmox, the Banished One "has +2/+2 for each card you discarded this game" (unlike, say Clutchmother Zavas, whose text reads "give it +2/+2," implying a buff). Changing the base stats don't work for the same reason changing base stats against Caverns Below Rogue never worked.
Effects that reads 'set to x' always worked against crystal core minions. The only reason why it doesn't work on kilmox is because its apparently an aura, which means its more often than not redundant, and kilmox is already a 3/3 to begin with (which is why turalyon's effect apparently did nothing)
Its actually weird why they made it that way. Theoretically that also means paladin has absolutely no counter against it other than killing it via trading. As if the card wasn't already OP enough.
Edit: Added some clarity as to why Turalyon didn't do anything to Kilmox (in brackets)
The above would arguably fix both Wild and Standard for the time being.
Lightning bloom and voracious reader I can sort of understand, but nerf risky skipper, palm reading, and aldrachi warblades?
Man you really must hate those cards a great deal. Especially Palm Reading, of which in your proposed nerf might as well just erase it from existence.
Palm Reading is effectively a Ramp card in Priest. Add it to a class with Big archetype available and you're in for idiotic matches. And it's bound to grow worse in Wild (where it is already a staple for all Priest meta archetypes).
Aldrachi Warblades nerf is quite obvious tbh. Leeching Poison nerf already happened for similar reasons. You can't have durable lifesteal on highly buffable weapons. Especially in an already more than solid class. Even more so if you decide to design a card like Il'gynoth.
Risky Skipper is admittedly daring, but I really don't know what to touch in Warrior. Skipper is one of the great staples.
I only hate less than half of the cards I suggested for nerfs, but either way I do have fairly good reasons.
Discounting wild since devs apparently don't design standard cards for wild anyway.
Palm Reading has a really powerful effect, as 1 mana spells in standard for priest is really strong. But considering that the class is probably only second to warrior in floating mana, the best possible outcome is they get to play Soul Mirror 1 turn earlier than usual, or have a go with either Nazmani Bloodweaver or [Hearthstone Card (sethekk vielweaver) Not Found]. I woudn't consider any of it remotely OP since priest cards aren't aggressive.
aldrachi isn't the real culprit; its team5's apparent love life with dhunter card designs and Il'gynoth that's causing the real problems. On its own aldrachi is simply another way for dhunters to heal back up (why they are the only tempo class that can be both aggressive and defensive is beyond me) and after the nerf is one of the worst weapons available. Even if we're committed to nerfing it, putting it at 4 mana does the job better, or even better yet, just nerf Blade Dance, probably the most efficient removal available.
I wouldn't worry about warrior. Its only going well for them because its currently an aggressive meta. In most cases if you can continually put minions on board they just die on their own
From what I can see lowering your MMA is not as easy as it looks. Probably gotta end your season more than once at silver rank.
Its better to just learn the matchups and play/build your deck accordingly. Tier 1-2 decks are tiered that way for a reason; because they win games. Even a subpar player have a good chance of winning if he's using a tier 1 deck against a homebrew fun deck. Those that don't subscribe to playing high tier decks are expected to raise their skill level and/or learn them up well, because that's what you'll be facing more than 95% of the time.
For those interested in Bunnyhopper's work (https://www.twitlonger.com/show/n_1srg57g) on the new system. Here's what I can summarize; (check it out. Its a worthwhile read)
- He made two assumptions, where 1 hour of gameplay will yield 400xp or 350xp (as it has been reported that waiting times don't add in to the xp gained). He concluded that if we assume a rate of 400xp per hour then at 2 hours and above it will pay out slightly (which is enough to win the argument anyway) above the old system, again assuming that we get 12.5 gold per hour in the old system (quests + 57% win rate)
The assumption is of course, just an assumption. I don't believe that 400xp per hour (as claimed by devs) is actually factual, since its clear that waiting times aren't technically gameplay. Also, there's been rumblings about that wins gets you more xp than losses. I can't confirm that naturally.
- Another thing from his analysis, is that in both his hourly xp gain assumptions, players playing less than 2 hours a day (most of us have to contend with family, work, and other games in our lives) will not be gaining from the new system.
- He has advised that we keep track of our hourly xp rate for a better picture. I do agree. Would of course be easier if blizz just have every match xp shown when the match ends, but we just can't have nice things can we?
There's just so much opaque about how this works exactly. Sums up what I really think about the new progressions system in general.
Im not even sure if they have compensated me for the 2 dailies missed.
Far as I know, weeklies have been compensated, and that should be pretty obvious since the amount is big, but for dailies? It better not be another stealth update to my xp. I'm having enough trouble keeping track as it is.
Ironic how china is one of the few countries on earth that actually recognizes the nuclear disaster lootboxes are to society enough that they call it gambling. Yeah, there's obviously loopholes, but a step is a step.
I read from reddit that its possible to get a 3rd party app to track the xp down. But I'm not yet desperate enough that I need a tracker so I can't tell you if this is real or working.
It really does sum up how dumb the new progression system is if its players are required to actually get a 3rd party app to do shit that any sane and transparent system should be doing on its own.
Unless you're one of those players putting out 2 hours a day on the game, expect to finish up the track late into month 3.
At present, I really don't see why any nerfs are needed. The most unfair card that is currently in top tier is Blade Dance, where it usually just clear boards while also allowing dhunters to crap on your face. Proper way to balance this would be having them to actually choose between hitting your face and destroying the board, or give it the Blade Flurry treatment and make it cost 3 or 4. Its just crazy how efficient blade dance is compared to most AoE effects.
Other than that, I'm not really seeing anything else really oppressive. Seems like outside of dhunters, nearly every deck on top that isn't a straight up combo deck actually needs a board to function (with the sole exception of bomb warrior, which for some reason still exists), and taunts aren't so easily brushed aside. Libram pally is pretty strong, but the only reason why its currently terrorizing the meta is because dhunters are everywhere and its natural predator, priest, is down on the dumps.
Best thing that's possible right now is probably to do either the following, in my opinion;
- Adjust dust costs for older cards. Either they give you more dust, or they cost less to craft. I personally don't see why blizz prize their older cards so much in the first place, since they've shown little to no care about wild in general. This will not affect their bottom line since most players would be interested in current expansion, and would increase what is now termed as 'engagement' with the game.
- Make the pack opening percentages transparent, and of higher quality. This is a long shot, but the total number of cards have been increasing while the pack quality has stayed as it is since beta. Pack openings have always been exciting, but only in theory. As any person who'd preordered at least once their their life can tell, 50 odd packs will yield little more than 3 legendaries on average, and in a world where there's 20 of them + whatever amount that will be introduced with the midexpansion, that's really bad value for money.
We don't really need to collect all the cards, most cards like Griftah will never see play to save its life (and obviously I have a copy of this). But I do think there should be a mechanism to help out players that get shafted by luck. And if blizz wants to save their own fragile reputation, it would do very well to start introducing some.
The game is fun, probably the only consensus you can get out of the community currently. If the monetization is shit, that's hardly news, we've pretty much been living in it for a good time now.
No doubt the community is justified in its outrage, but at present we can only hope that blizz sorts itself out so we can get on to discussing about the game rather than the bs surrounding it.
Its probably going to be somewhere around early Jan 2021. Most adventures, and even Galakrond's awakening, starts about 2 months into an expansion. It is after all a midexpansion.
The reason why tickatus isn't doing well is fairly obvious. The meta is swamped with dhunters and hunters. Both won't really care much losing 10 cards. But I'm convinced its more likely because the list isn't refined.
Same reason why ETC is doing well. Control warrior tends to do well against aggro.
If the meta shifts to slower decks like priests, then warlock may make a comeback.
Actually got round to thinking about this a little further; I think the real question is whether it is now time for BG and duels to exist on their own server, their own client, and therefore also their own progressions and rewards. Even arena seems a bit out of place compared to standard ranked play. This will resolve the quests issues entirely, as well as give non-ranked players quests that actually matter to them.
Maybe its going a bit too far to suggest partitioning now, but I do certainly think that those that prefer rank shouldn't be given quests that don't matter to them, and vice versa to those that prefer non-rank modes.
I wouldn't hold my breath on this - there's really zero incentive to split the games (probably ever).
Hearthstone is F2P, so Blizzard wants to drive high player engagement (obviously - in every F2P game, the more engagement you get out of any given player, the more likely that player is to feel invested enough to pay for something in game). These quests work as nudges from a behavioral economics standpoint. You can opt out of them by re-rolling if you really don't like them, but they might nudge players toward trying out formats that they wouldn't otherwise consider. That can be mutually beneficial; for players who find a format they like as much or more than ladder, they have more fun, and for Blizzard they get higher engagement from the player in question.
Quick side note, I believe this engagement issue is why Hearthstone has invested so much in new game modes and why there's yet another new game mode coming soon. The Arena "draft mode" for Hearthstone has always been terrible compared to other CCGs, and the various Auto-Chess games out there were stealing away players from the traditional "competitive, turn-based strategy game" market that CCGs exist in. Duels basically solves the "draft mode" problem (leaving Arena limping along), so it should be interesting to see what the next new format is.
I wouldn't disagree. It wouldn't exactly be rocket science to figure out why the non-ranked quests are almost exclusively weeklies. That doesn't make it any less annoying. Just hoping they would realize that incentivizing players to try other stuff is positive; but there's always that thin line where the carrot is dangled up high enough that the experience becomes a mess of frustration. They demonstrated a lack of understanding of this when 'Finish an arena run with 4 or more wins.' was added into the pool of weekly quests, which is honestly scary.
Its funny that you bring up arena as a terrible mode, and its sister duels to be the superior of the two. I personally find the arena style of play more suitable as a game mode, and its more engaging too, since no drafts are ever exactly the same and is somewhat more skill reliant. Duels suffer from this slightly, being more predictable at the start, progressively being more luck reliant than skill as specific treasures offerings start offsetting skill as the main determinant of wins. All arena really needed is a casual mode, where you can play infinitely at your leisure. But since arena isn't limited by card collection or any bs requirements for treasures and hero powers, and therefore having almost no potential for profits, I'm definitely not holding any breath on a casual mode being implemented (however easy it may be to do) anytime soon.
Its precisely the efficiency of its economics that makes me shudder whenever I get reminded of upcoming 'new game modes'.
Actually got round to thinking about this a little further; I think the real question is whether it is now time for BG and duels to exist on their own server, their own client, and therefore also their own progressions and rewards. Even arena seems a bit out of place compared to standard ranked play. This will resolve the quests issues entirely, as well as give non-ranked players quests that actually matter to them.
Maybe its going a bit too far to suggest partitioning now, but I do certainly think that those that prefer rank shouldn't be given quests that don't matter to them, and vice versa to those that prefer non-rank modes.
While I agree with many things you stated here, I will state that from what I have seen in the reddit threads and from forums like this one, the hate is coming from the following;
- Hearthstone is expensive. This perhaps should surprise no one, least of all anyone who'd ever played a trading card game. But I'm having trouble naming any other virtual card game thats flagrantly more expensive to have fun in than hearthstone. We don't really need to go into specifics. All that is required is to simply ask the question: Can you recommend this game to any of your friends in good faith. And the short answer would likely (or almost certainly be) no. And that's largely because every one of us understands how expensive, and how much commitment it takes to get to where we are today.
- In conjunction to the above, the new progression system did nothing less than bring greater focus on the price of the game. The tavern pass (which up until then was the name given to the BG pass) now rebranded without any notice, and as such it was not included into the 80 bucks preorder. So on top of a preorder, which pretty much gave the buyer all the exclusive cosmetics previously, there's now an added 20 bucks needed to absolutely have it all. So, if you don't want to miss out on all the exclusive items, it now costs a mind blogging 100 bucks. And to top it all off, you're not likely to even get half of all the legendaries.
Your argument that you don't need to get all the cards to play the game is correct. But to put things in perspective. I opened 60 packs in darkmoon and got 4 legendaries, none of which were the old gods. Can't experiment much when you're missing out on the centerpiece of this expansion. Can't even experiment much actually, since I got both pally legendaries and I don't have some of the core cards needed to play pally at any decent tier. So Im pretty stuck with the same decks I had in the previous expansion with a few tweaks. And this is not the first time I find myself in such a position.
- Midexpansion is a thing now. So with all the stated above, this one makes it even worse. Its hard not to point at sheer avarice when preordering doesn't get you much, and you're now praying there would be a 'promotional' 20 bucks sale from blizz just to keep up.
- But perhaps the greatest reasons for all the hate was simply blizz was seen apparently breaking their promise when they said they weren't taking away the amount of gold we can get from the old system, in the new system. A blatant lie, as even poor mathematicians like me can spot that we were pretty much shafted around 1000 - 2000 gold.
Yes, the card packs and cards should be taken into account when totaling the rewards. Doesn't change a thing, since the promise was explicit. Whether it was intentional or reasonable for blizz to have one of their guys make such a promise is not the issue. Fact is that everyone was kept optimistic. And they were let down like a father breaking a promise to his 10 yr old kid. Not exactly sterling public relations work.
And it took like a 2 weeks before blizz addressed this issue at all. The changes were good, coming really close to breaking even, but its a case where its just too little too late.
Bottom line is, I don't think this battlepass debacle is the end of the world, but unless they quickly address all the bugs, fix some of their own quest requirements (play 50 corrupt cards might as well be a bug, or a middle-finger design choice), relook into hearthstone's general costs, and for gods sake improve their own communication with the community, hearthstone will forever be tainted by its negatives, as opposed to its positives.
I have to agree that playing hearthstone isn't as it once was. While its nice to know that a lost now isn't the end of the world, since both sides gets xp for it, you can go upwards to 7 wins a day and feel like nothing has changed.
I do expect some kind of response. The duels tournament fiasco should be enough to force blizz into one. Let's hope that they see sense and make some positive changes, and get back to the good graces of the community again (at least neutral if nothing else)
Effects that reads 'set to x' always worked against crystal core minions. The only reason why it doesn't work on kilmox is because its apparently an aura, which means its more often than not redundant, and kilmox is already a 3/3 to begin with (which is why turalyon's effect apparently did nothing)
Its actually weird why they made it that way. Theoretically that also means paladin has absolutely no counter against it other than killing it via trading. As if the card wasn't already OP enough.
Edit: Added some clarity as to why Turalyon didn't do anything to Kilmox (in brackets)
Snowflake? Blizzard?
Its a secret plot from blizz to get us to spend more money, I'm sure of it.
Discounting wild since devs apparently don't design standard cards for wild anyway.
Palm Reading has a really powerful effect, as 1 mana spells in standard for priest is really strong. But considering that the class is probably only second to warrior in floating mana, the best possible outcome is they get to play Soul Mirror 1 turn earlier than usual, or have a go with either Nazmani Bloodweaver or [Hearthstone Card (sethekk vielweaver) Not Found]. I woudn't consider any of it remotely OP since priest cards aren't aggressive.
aldrachi isn't the real culprit; its team5's apparent love life with dhunter card designs and Il'gynoth that's causing the real problems. On its own aldrachi is simply another way for dhunters to heal back up (why they are the only tempo class that can be both aggressive and defensive is beyond me) and after the nerf is one of the worst weapons available. Even if we're committed to nerfing it, putting it at 4 mana does the job better, or even better yet, just nerf Blade Dance, probably the most efficient removal available.
I wouldn't worry about warrior. Its only going well for them because its currently an aggressive meta. In most cases if you can continually put minions on board they just die on their own
From what I can see lowering your MMA is not as easy as it looks. Probably gotta end your season more than once at silver rank.
Its better to just learn the matchups and play/build your deck accordingly. Tier 1-2 decks are tiered that way for a reason; because they win games. Even a subpar player have a good chance of winning if he's using a tier 1 deck against a homebrew fun deck. Those that don't subscribe to playing high tier decks are expected to raise their skill level and/or learn them up well, because that's what you'll be facing more than 95% of the time.
If its any consolation; you still get xp for it.
I thought this was an exclusive BG thing, but I guess that stealth nerf to AFK players made xp farmers a little more desperate.
For those interested in Bunnyhopper's work (https://www.twitlonger.com/show/n_1srg57g) on the new system. Here's what I can summarize; (check it out. Its a worthwhile read)
- He made two assumptions, where 1 hour of gameplay will yield 400xp or 350xp (as it has been reported that waiting times don't add in to the xp gained). He concluded that if we assume a rate of 400xp per hour then at 2 hours and above it will pay out slightly (which is enough to win the argument anyway) above the old system, again assuming that we get 12.5 gold per hour in the old system (quests + 57% win rate)
The assumption is of course, just an assumption. I don't believe that 400xp per hour (as claimed by devs) is actually factual, since its clear that waiting times aren't technically gameplay. Also, there's been rumblings about that wins gets you more xp than losses. I can't confirm that naturally.
- Another thing from his analysis, is that in both his hourly xp gain assumptions, players playing less than 2 hours a day (most of us have to contend with family, work, and other games in our lives) will not be gaining from the new system.
- He has advised that we keep track of our hourly xp rate for a better picture. I do agree. Would of course be easier if blizz just have every match xp shown when the match ends, but we just can't have nice things can we?
There's just so much opaque about how this works exactly. Sums up what I really think about the new progressions system in general.
Lightning bloom and voracious reader I can sort of understand, but nerf risky skipper, palm reading, and aldrachi warblades?
Man you really must hate those cards a great deal. Especially Palm Reading, of which in your proposed nerf might as well just erase it from existence.
Im not even sure if they have compensated me for the 2 dailies missed.
Far as I know, weeklies have been compensated, and that should be pretty obvious since the amount is big, but for dailies? It better not be another stealth update to my xp. I'm having enough trouble keeping track as it is.
Ironic how china is one of the few countries on earth that actually recognizes the nuclear disaster lootboxes are to society enough that they call it gambling. Yeah, there's obviously loopholes, but a step is a step.
I read from reddit that its possible to get a 3rd party app to track the xp down. But I'm not yet desperate enough that I need a tracker so I can't tell you if this is real or working.
It really does sum up how dumb the new progression system is if its players are required to actually get a 3rd party app to do shit that any sane and transparent system should be doing on its own.
Unless you're one of those players putting out 2 hours a day on the game, expect to finish up the track late into month 3.
At present, I really don't see why any nerfs are needed. The most unfair card that is currently in top tier is Blade Dance, where it usually just clear boards while also allowing dhunters to crap on your face. Proper way to balance this would be having them to actually choose between hitting your face and destroying the board, or give it the Blade Flurry treatment and make it cost 3 or 4. Its just crazy how efficient blade dance is compared to most AoE effects.
Other than that, I'm not really seeing anything else really oppressive. Seems like outside of dhunters, nearly every deck on top that isn't a straight up combo deck actually needs a board to function (with the sole exception of bomb warrior, which for some reason still exists), and taunts aren't so easily brushed aside. Libram pally is pretty strong, but the only reason why its currently terrorizing the meta is because dhunters are everywhere and its natural predator, priest, is down on the dumps.
Best thing that's possible right now is probably to do either the following, in my opinion;
- Adjust dust costs for older cards. Either they give you more dust, or they cost less to craft. I personally don't see why blizz prize their older cards so much in the first place, since they've shown little to no care about wild in general. This will not affect their bottom line since most players would be interested in current expansion, and would increase what is now termed as 'engagement' with the game.
- Make the pack opening percentages transparent, and of higher quality. This is a long shot, but the total number of cards have been increasing while the pack quality has stayed as it is since beta. Pack openings have always been exciting, but only in theory. As any person who'd preordered at least once their their life can tell, 50 odd packs will yield little more than 3 legendaries on average, and in a world where there's 20 of them + whatever amount that will be introduced with the midexpansion, that's really bad value for money.
We don't really need to collect all the cards, most cards like Griftah will never see play to save its life (and obviously I have a copy of this). But I do think there should be a mechanism to help out players that get shafted by luck. And if blizz wants to save their own fragile reputation, it would do very well to start introducing some.
The game is fun, probably the only consensus you can get out of the community currently. If the monetization is shit, that's hardly news, we've pretty much been living in it for a good time now.
No doubt the community is justified in its outrage, but at present we can only hope that blizz sorts itself out so we can get on to discussing about the game rather than the bs surrounding it.
Its probably going to be somewhere around early Jan 2021. Most adventures, and even Galakrond's awakening, starts about 2 months into an expansion. It is after all a midexpansion.
The reason why tickatus isn't doing well is fairly obvious. The meta is swamped with dhunters and hunters. Both won't really care much losing 10 cards. But I'm convinced its more likely because the list isn't refined.
Same reason why ETC is doing well. Control warrior tends to do well against aggro.
If the meta shifts to slower decks like priests, then warlock may make a comeback.
I wouldn't disagree. It wouldn't exactly be rocket science to figure out why the non-ranked quests are almost exclusively weeklies. That doesn't make it any less annoying. Just hoping they would realize that incentivizing players to try other stuff is positive; but there's always that thin line where the carrot is dangled up high enough that the experience becomes a mess of frustration. They demonstrated a lack of understanding of this when 'Finish an arena run with 4 or more wins.' was added into the pool of weekly quests, which is honestly scary.
Its funny that you bring up arena as a terrible mode, and its sister duels to be the superior of the two. I personally find the arena style of play more suitable as a game mode, and its more engaging too, since no drafts are ever exactly the same and is somewhat more skill reliant. Duels suffer from this slightly, being more predictable at the start, progressively being more luck reliant than skill as specific treasures offerings start offsetting skill as the main determinant of wins. All arena really needed is a casual mode, where you can play infinitely at your leisure. But since arena isn't limited by card collection or any bs requirements for treasures and hero powers, and therefore having almost no potential for profits, I'm definitely not holding any breath on a casual mode being implemented (however easy it may be to do) anytime soon.
Its precisely the efficiency of its economics that makes me shudder whenever I get reminded of upcoming 'new game modes'.
This is so devious. Giving garbage to non dhunters while maintaining perfect advantage. I like it.
I played a different version of yours. 6 manafeeder panthara, 4 satyr overseers. My opponent conceded turn 2 :)
Actually got round to thinking about this a little further; I think the real question is whether it is now time for BG and duels to exist on their own server, their own client, and therefore also their own progressions and rewards. Even arena seems a bit out of place compared to standard ranked play. This will resolve the quests issues entirely, as well as give non-ranked players quests that actually matter to them.
Maybe its going a bit too far to suggest partitioning now, but I do certainly think that those that prefer rank shouldn't be given quests that don't matter to them, and vice versa to those that prefer non-rank modes.
While I agree with many things you stated here, I will state that from what I have seen in the reddit threads and from forums like this one, the hate is coming from the following;
- Hearthstone is expensive. This perhaps should surprise no one, least of all anyone who'd ever played a trading card game. But I'm having trouble naming any other virtual card game thats flagrantly more expensive to have fun in than hearthstone. We don't really need to go into specifics. All that is required is to simply ask the question: Can you recommend this game to any of your friends in good faith. And the short answer would likely (or almost certainly be) no. And that's largely because every one of us understands how expensive, and how much commitment it takes to get to where we are today.
- In conjunction to the above, the new progression system did nothing less than bring greater focus on the price of the game. The tavern pass (which up until then was the name given to the BG pass) now rebranded without any notice, and as such it was not included into the 80 bucks preorder. So on top of a preorder, which pretty much gave the buyer all the exclusive cosmetics previously, there's now an added 20 bucks needed to absolutely have it all. So, if you don't want to miss out on all the exclusive items, it now costs a mind blogging 100 bucks. And to top it all off, you're not likely to even get half of all the legendaries.
Your argument that you don't need to get all the cards to play the game is correct. But to put things in perspective. I opened 60 packs in darkmoon and got 4 legendaries, none of which were the old gods. Can't experiment much when you're missing out on the centerpiece of this expansion. Can't even experiment much actually, since I got both pally legendaries and I don't have some of the core cards needed to play pally at any decent tier. So Im pretty stuck with the same decks I had in the previous expansion with a few tweaks. And this is not the first time I find myself in such a position.
- Midexpansion is a thing now. So with all the stated above, this one makes it even worse. Its hard not to point at sheer avarice when preordering doesn't get you much, and you're now praying there would be a 'promotional' 20 bucks sale from blizz just to keep up.
- But perhaps the greatest reasons for all the hate was simply blizz was seen apparently breaking their promise when they said they weren't taking away the amount of gold we can get from the old system, in the new system. A blatant lie, as even poor mathematicians like me can spot that we were pretty much shafted around 1000 - 2000 gold.
Yes, the card packs and cards should be taken into account when totaling the rewards. Doesn't change a thing, since the promise was explicit. Whether it was intentional or reasonable for blizz to have one of their guys make such a promise is not the issue. Fact is that everyone was kept optimistic. And they were let down like a father breaking a promise to his 10 yr old kid. Not exactly sterling public relations work.
And it took like a 2 weeks before blizz addressed this issue at all. The changes were good, coming really close to breaking even, but its a case where its just too little too late.
Bottom line is, I don't think this battlepass debacle is the end of the world, but unless they quickly address all the bugs, fix some of their own quest requirements (play 50 corrupt cards might as well be a bug, or a middle-finger design choice), relook into hearthstone's general costs, and for gods sake improve their own communication with the community, hearthstone will forever be tainted by its negatives, as opposed to its positives.
I have to agree that playing hearthstone isn't as it once was. While its nice to know that a lost now isn't the end of the world, since both sides gets xp for it, you can go upwards to 7 wins a day and feel like nothing has changed.
I do expect some kind of response. The duels tournament fiasco should be enough to force blizz into one. Let's hope that they see sense and make some positive changes, and get back to the good graces of the community again (at least neutral if nothing else)