dapperdog

Its a good deal, for the number of packs on offer. But unfortunately, its 3 packs per expansion, and if you're wanting to have a go with wild, 3 packs is hardly a good starting point to start from. They should have just let you choose the packs you want instead, really.

So, have to be a skip for …

Dont have time for both battlegrounds and regular hearthstone. I did play a little when dragons were up. Never got Tirion, but faced him a few times.

Just an honest question really. At this point I dont think I'll get a chance with him.

I dont think I ever met a single mage that isnt highlander throughout DoD. I must be the only quest mage playing around in standard. And no, its not good.

I dont have anything against [card]the amazing reno[/card]. Its obviously intended HP was to balance out the ridiculous battlecry. But I cant help feeling like matches are determined solely …

Meta is healthy. As for fun, can't say for sure. Its either I get blown out by BM happy face/dragon hunters, or enduring that spectacle that is Reno's random spells going against me and costing me the game.

[card]The amazing reno[/card] is in particularly problematic, not because the card is OP but because nearly every turn is an unpredictable …

Lol, I didn't even get a chance with him. Can anyone say if he's too good, or just trash?

Havent actually tried out the new Galakrond resurrect priest yet. But from early impressions, it doesnt seem better than quest res.

Anyone able to detail why Galakrond is a better fit than quest? Especially since it only destroys 2 minions max, and random priest minions are still generally garbage compared to a decent +3/3 hero power.

As have been mentioned, there's no need for an endorsement system since its not a team game at heart. It wouldn't matter to me if I won/lost to someone who racked up 100 endorsements vs one that has -100. Unless there's a consequence to having more endorsement to less, there's just no reason to want one other than conceit.

…

The only time I get rattled by the characters is when they insist on speaking their overly long lines even after I've restarted the match for the tenth time in a roll.

Other than that, Ive always like new spins on old characters. Maybe someday they will drag up the MsoG characters back.

Quote From Meteorite12

They specifically said a little while ago that they were gonna wait awhile before doing another set of connected expansions.

Must have missed that one. Would be such a shame though. I like the connected expansions idea, so much potential.

Thanks for the confirm. Guess the wording "your other minions have rush" means if he dies then the other minions loses their rush.

On the other hand if the wording was "give your other minions rush" then it wouldnt matter if he dies.

Makes me wonder what the interaction would be for minions with a dying Shaw with …

Fairly certain that's how Shaw works. I can vaguely recall a time where I had two Shaws up and both had rush despite one dying after an attack. Copying a minion Shaw has given rush to also allows it to rush. As far as I know its not an aura effect that goes away after he's gone.

Not sure …

Judging by how the expansions story line are tied into one, and the fact that we saw no dragons for the first two expansions, I'm guessing that the year of the phoenix will likely not feature any actual relation with the subject until year end as well.

We had a somewhat cartoony good vs evil theme in the year …

Dr boom = 3 mana all mechs have charge

There's way too many mechs from deathrattles. With [card]omega assembly[/card] it allows warrior to play out a full control deck and still be able to burst out opponents after playing dr boom.

Some of the nerfs seems redundant now. Like [card]keeper of the grove[/card], [card]hunter's mark[/card], [card]ancient of lore[/card], and crucially [card]blade flurry[/card], which even back then I thought the mana nerf was unnecessary.

Would be nice if they were reverted back, even if for a short time.

I think its one of those moments where I agree with the devs that a change in mechanics like that can make the game needlessly complicated.

If the effect is given when its played, then it should stick. Kinda like how if something is given rush, lifesteal, etc. then copies of it should also gain it. Like [card]houndmaster shaw[/card], …

Perfect time to try off metas to be honest. Will be tanking mine with quest mage all day until tomorrow.

I dont want to drag this any further, but your statement that the same results can be achieved with similar, but non flawed cards is bold, very much indeed .

Your argument rests on someone being able to introduce better card design that achieves the same goals as team5 has set, but without the flaws. I look forward to …

Quote From RavenSunHS

Quote From dapperdog

Those cards you cited are very situational, and while they do produce an amazing effect, it cannot be jammed into just about any deck.

Its not just nerfing strong cards, its about making sure that the balance of the classes are within acceptable ranges. Its a hard task, admitably, …

Quote From Meteorite12

Eh, you still find Control decks here and there from 10-5 in wild, I met a good few of them when I was climbing earlier this month. A lot of the meta is aggro and combo, but it’s not that unusual really to meet some off meta deck high up in the ranks.

If …

Quote From RavenSunHS

Quote From dapperdog

I honestly think team5 should just straight up admit that balancing wild is easier said than done, since its a vast amount of cards and complexity. 

[...]

Please, tell me how Crystology, Ancient Mysteries, or Plague of Flames (just to name a few) are …