dapperdog

The factors to winning with [card]dark pharaoh tekahn[/card] for rogue;

- Draw [card]dragon's hoard[/card] - No easy feat in of itself. Literally highrolling every turn to get it

- Get [card]dark pharaoh tekahn[/card] from the discover - Another highroll

- Actually have lackeys - Easy enough, but no one hoards their lackeys for a possible tekahn

…

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. The point that wild is supposed to be that place you go to to enjoy cards you used to enjoy is only relevant at the very bottom of the ranks where you don't see …

So we have to sit here nice and tight for another 2 weeks? At least tease us with something. I was looking forward to seeing the first six cards of the new expansion, then wait two weeks for the rest of them to start trickling in.

Agreed on accessibility, and if they ever make available the year of the dragon packs, I'd be interested as well.

But there's no reason to put a higher price tag on it, especially since its mostly likely to land you commons and rares, and at this point most people who care about that class would have already got it …

Chances are good Celeste is an elemental similar to [card]harbinger celestia[/card] (who remembers this card, lol). Then again, since anything that's exclusive to hearthstone tend to have a softer look/tone, it might just be a little elemental girl with shining blue eyes, a wide smile, and a cute squeaky voice.

Its a fair assumption that most people will be avoiding the mage packs like the plague, so at least only a few players would be affected.

Hearts out to those who did buy it. But lets be honest, whether its mage packs or warlock packs, if it doesn't guarantee legendaries or epics, for what reason will this be bought …

I wonder if this means we will only be getting the packs from the dailies, not gold.

I'd like to hear it from Bliz themselves, why the heck is this priced at a higher price than usual and how the heck they could have thought this to be okay.

At least guarantee a legendary, that's maybe worth 10 bucks, just maybe.

Quote From RavenSunHS

Thing is, shareholders are bound to acknowledge that putting customers (and product originality) ahead of immediate revenue is actually what made Blizzard such a valuable brand!

Granted, i am no professional in finance, but if i were a shareholder i'd be appalled by Activision-Blizzard in recent years!

Afterall, finance is about perceived future …

Quote From h0lysatan

Quote From DoubleSummon

Quote From Rippy

Quote From DoubleSummon

Don't put your hopes up it's Activison Blizzard we are talking about it will look good on paper but in the long run they will take more money from us if we want to continue playing.

Hey …

Face hunter.

For certain decks, this is just an auto lost. The only reason why this is even slightly tolerable is because of [card]zilliax[/card] and that guy's rotating out. It reminds me a lot of odd paladin where nearly all my deckbuilding efforts have to first confront this silly idea of whether it has even the slightest chance against …

Kripp seems to be impressed, and that's usually a good enough reason for some amount of optimism.

Apart from making it cheaper to have fun in hearthstone, the only other thing is to mix up the evergreen set, maybe taking some cards from expansions. Making evergreen a rotational thing is both a good thing from a business perspective and …

Here's a few points on your list;

- Its an embiggen-strength in numbers deck. That's your win condition. It therefore follows that there should be 2x [card]embiggen[/card] and 2x [card]strength in numbers[/card]
- Your list should include as few battlecrys as is manageable and feasible, with more emphasis on rush minions, taunts, and deathrattles
- Embiggen decks dont tend …

Lol, you get a thumbs up from me simply for resorting to that technicality. With that definition even the basic set is 'competitive'.

But in all seriousness, there's a good reason why the argument "Hearthstone is too expensive to play/have fun with" is not easily countered with [card]Whizbang the wonderful[/card]. I think that suffices as a counter argument.

Quote From h0lysatan

Being a pessimistic player, I don't see that this will happen.

Firstly, In my terribly honest opinion, Blizzard is not really a pure F2P game. When you want to play a competitive deck, you surely have to work your way to that deck, either by buying it, or work your way slowly, grinding gold …

Was doing very well with highlander warrior, what with all the embiggens on a downward spiral in terms of play rate. It should be mentioned that dragon hunter going down remarkably consistently when they either don't draw their weapon, or when you destroy it.

Hmmm...doing well, me? Time to tank my rank by going warlock until the month ends.

I think its more about the fact that you're playing a 7 mana card that does nothing to reduce tempo on board.

If [card]countess ashmore[/card] draws a playable taunt, or playable and decent rush-lifesteal minion, then perhaps there's some hope for the poor dragoness. At around turn 6-above are turns where playing cards that doesn't affect board tempo is …

I just like to see the percentage so when it happens to me I can feel like a one percenter for at least once in my life.

Quote From Zelgadis

Quote From dapperdog

Quote From Zelgadis

A 1:1 ratio wouldn't work, as others have pointed out. But 1:2 shouldn't break the economy while still making crafting a lot more affordable, which could increase deck variety on ladder.

A different change they could make is add a no-triplicate rule for epics, …

Quote From Zelgadis

A 1:1 ratio wouldn't work, as others have pointed out. But 1:2 shouldn't break the economy while still making crafting a lot more affordable, which could increase deck variety on ladder.

A different change they could make is add a no-triplicate rule for epics, like we have a no-duplicate rule for legendaries. It always …