1) A continuation of the "Year of the X" story format, told through expansions and Adventures/PvE game modes. Year of the Dragon worked well.
2) The addition of Dragons and potentially other tribes, like Pirates, into BGs.
3) Economic reconfiguration. When it comes to word of mouth advertising, perception is reality, and the game doesn't feel as fair or fun if you're a new, F2P player compared to someone who's already got a decent collection. Even if that wasn't the case, I feel like 10 gold every 3 wins is boring and dated, and quest rewards (with the exception of special event quests) aren't exciting. I think they'll use one of two approaches: 1) Lots of small changes (gold reward sources and amounts, the crafting economy, the content in each pack, etc.) that improve things, or 2) A new core system, such as a weekly-capped XP system that you fill by winning games and completing quests and which rewards packs in a giant chest.
4) Continued card balancing. They've shown they're more willing to do something about problematic cards, and most of their nerfs aren't as heavy-handed as in the past. Hell, 2019 even saw the first buffs in the game's history! All signs of movement in the right direction.
What I'd be surprised to see:
1) A new game mode. However, this is something I'd be the least surprised to see, because BGs came out of nowhere and a new game mode might get content creators more excited than "the game is getting better" type changes. If we do see a new game mode, I expect some kind of co-op PvP instead of the thing they've already basically cancelled: Tournament Mode.
2) Massive rebalancing, specifically of the Basic and Classic sets. Because they've adopted a more agile balance philosophy, I think they'll tweak cards as necessary instead of dealing with a bunch of cards at once. However, I think we COULD see a change in how Standard works by swapping over to a curated pool each season: only certain Evergreen cards are made available, plus the cards from 3-4 expansions selected by Blizzard. This would address the core meta/deckbuilding stagnation issue that the current Evergreen model has.
3) Hearthstone 2. Even if it's not a distinct sequel and is something along the lines of Overwatch 2 or Fortnite Chapter 2, I don't expect any massive engine or core gameplay mechanical changes that would necessitate a rebranding.
It's not weird for personnel to be shuffled around. What I find weird is the lack of an announcement, which tells me there could be a few more people who got transferred and they were waiting to announce it all at once. It could also indicate Mike and/or Peter weren't too happy about it, so they let it slip early, but that'd be making too many assumptions imo.
You should post on Reddit, you'll get dem sweeeeet Internet Points. Commenting on any potentially negative news to say Blizzard is dead is the lowest hanging fruit you can grab nowadays.
Methinks they're gonna break Dancin' Deryl's legs. The Hero Power will read: "After you sell a minion, randomly give two different minions in Bob’s Tavern +1/+1." This makes it harder to superbuff a single minion.
Aside from that, I'm not sure what else they'd tweak in terms of hero balance. Maybe make Rafaam's Hero Power more expensive, George's less expensive (-1), and... besides that, I don't know. I think they'd all be pretty balanced.
Although I know Amalgam might be returning (with nerfed stats, most likely), I'm glad it's gone. Strategies should synergize, but Amalgam was too flexible and made you value the actual minions of a tribe less.
They should probably make Galakrond summon 1/1s, then 2/2s, then 4/4s. That way, the design of the Battlecry stays in line with the other Galakronds, but it's less busted.
Yes, Kripp is a bit flat while streaming, but he brings some energy to his YouTube intros (granted, they're rarely longer than a few minutes) so I think he CAN be energetic. I hope he sprinkles some salt in, but with the devs right there it'll probably be as a joke, nothing serious. "Never lucky" is literally in his name (nl_Kripp).
Future Team 5: "Hey, we were thinking of bringing some Wild cards back into Standard for a few-"
Emotionally scarred post-Doom in the Tomb HS players: "NO!"
As for the BGs changes, I'm not sure if +2/+1 is enough of a nerf; the power comes more from affecting all minion types. Still, nerfing +Health is more impactful than +Attack. If Blizzard keeps updating BGs relatively quickly, as they have been, then these small, iterative changes can work. If it's not enough of a nerf, keep going until it is.
I'm excited to try King Bagurgle, though I forgot what the other new minion will be. I have no idea who the heroes will be, either, but I hope they're interesting and worthy of consideration when picking.
Think there'll be any decks that buff the crap out of their minions? If so, this could be pretty good. I'll be honest, I'm not even sure summoning a copy would keep its buffs - my instinct says "No", and if so, then it'd only be worth copying minions with strong Deathrattles or persistent effects, or ones with huge base stats. So... probably an average card, another tool in Priest's back pocket.
There seems to be a lot of slower, Control-oriented cards in DoD. Swapping the cost of a beefy late-game minion with a 2- or 3-cost spell or minion is one of the best outcomes for this card. However, it goes both ways. Most spells that you'd include in your deck are on the cheap side (let's say, at or below 5 Mana), and having a key removal or combo spell's cost increased because of bad luck would be pretty frustrating. I don't think it'll have enough reliable upside to put in your deck.
I'm not sure about this card yet. If Hunter can consistently build strong early-game boards with at least 1 Dragon in them, then the amount of pressure Stormhammer provides is scary. However, there aren't a plethora of cheap Dragons, so we must also consider how good it'd be in the mid- to late-game. 3 damage is a nice amount for that extra push to remove a must-kill minion or get through a Taunt, but you're taking damage to do it. In the late-game, where Dragons should be at their strongest, repeated 3 damage to face can help end the game if you have ways to get through any Taunts that might be played.
There's also the Ubiquity Paradox: the stronger a weapon is (and, thus, the more it's played), the weaker it becomes due to an increase of easy, cheap weapon removal techs.
I'll just say I'd be more surprised to see this in fast decks than as part of a finisher for slower decks.
Doomsayer, but better for anti-Aggro purposes. Rare instead of Epic, comes down a Turn earlier, not easy to remove if played immediately. Worse than Doomsayer in the mid/late-game, assuming you can protect Doomsayer for a turn, but I daresay Doomsayer was most often played on Turn 2 or 3 against Aggro.
As of November 30th, still no Shaman Galakrond reveal. Judging by the rest of the set, I feel like it's going to have a slower effect, suited for Control. Might interact with Overload. We'll see...!
Over the course of the year, I expect to see:
1) A continuation of the "Year of the X" story format, told through expansions and Adventures/PvE game modes. Year of the Dragon worked well.
2) The addition of Dragons and potentially other tribes, like Pirates, into BGs.
3) Economic reconfiguration. When it comes to word of mouth advertising, perception is reality, and the game doesn't feel as fair or fun if you're a new, F2P player compared to someone who's already got a decent collection. Even if that wasn't the case, I feel like 10 gold every 3 wins is boring and dated, and quest rewards (with the exception of special event quests) aren't exciting. I think they'll use one of two approaches: 1) Lots of small changes (gold reward sources and amounts, the crafting economy, the content in each pack, etc.) that improve things, or 2) A new core system, such as a weekly-capped XP system that you fill by winning games and completing quests and which rewards packs in a giant chest.
4) Continued card balancing. They've shown they're more willing to do something about problematic cards, and most of their nerfs aren't as heavy-handed as in the past. Hell, 2019 even saw the first buffs in the game's history! All signs of movement in the right direction.
What I'd be surprised to see:
1) A new game mode. However, this is something I'd be the least surprised to see, because BGs came out of nowhere and a new game mode might get content creators more excited than "the game is getting better" type changes. If we do see a new game mode, I expect some kind of co-op PvP instead of the thing they've already basically cancelled: Tournament Mode.
2) Massive rebalancing, specifically of the Basic and Classic sets. Because they've adopted a more agile balance philosophy, I think they'll tweak cards as necessary instead of dealing with a bunch of cards at once. However, I think we COULD see a change in how Standard works by swapping over to a curated pool each season: only certain Evergreen cards are made available, plus the cards from 3-4 expansions selected by Blizzard. This would address the core meta/deckbuilding stagnation issue that the current Evergreen model has.
3) Hearthstone 2. Even if it's not a distinct sequel and is something along the lines of Overwatch 2 or Fortnite Chapter 2, I don't expect any massive engine or core gameplay mechanical changes that would necessitate a rebranding.
Gotta go faaaaaaaaaaast!
Haven't heard of anyone else yet, but I only pay attention to WoW and OW to a lesser extent.
It's not weird for personnel to be shuffled around. What I find weird is the lack of an announcement, which tells me there could be a few more people who got transferred and they were waiting to announce it all at once. It could also indicate Mike and/or Peter weren't too happy about it, so they let it slip early, but that'd be making too many assumptions imo.
Ugh, gotta remember to go to YouTube now. I hope their Google paycheck was worth it.
You should post on Reddit, you'll get dem sweeeeet Internet Points. Commenting on any potentially negative news to say Blizzard is dead is the lowest hanging fruit you can grab nowadays.
Methinks they're gonna break Dancin' Deryl's legs. The Hero Power will read: "After you sell a minion, randomly give two different minions in Bob’s Tavern +1/+1." This makes it harder to superbuff a single minion.
Aside from that, I'm not sure what else they'd tweak in terms of hero balance. Maybe make Rafaam's Hero Power more expensive, George's less expensive (-1), and... besides that, I don't know. I think they'd all be pretty balanced.
I'm okay with a Warrior meta if it doesn't involve Dr. Boom and 100 Armor.
Although I know Amalgam might be returning (with nerfed stats, most likely), I'm glad it's gone. Strategies should synergize, but Amalgam was too flexible and made you value the actual minions of a tribe less.
They should probably make Galakrond summon 1/1s, then 2/2s, then 4/4s. That way, the design of the Battlecry stays in line with the other Galakronds, but it's less busted.
By removing Evolve, the meta is evolving from a bad place.
First, me break their PLATE.
Then, me break their FACE.
SMOrc
Heyguyshow'sitgoingKripparrianhere.
Yes, Kripp is a bit flat while streaming, but he brings some energy to his YouTube intros (granted, they're rarely longer than a few minutes) so I think he CAN be energetic. I hope he sprinkles some salt in, but with the devs right there it'll probably be as a joke, nothing serious. "Never lucky" is literally in his name (nl_Kripp).
Future Team 5: "Hey, we were thinking of bringing some Wild cards back into Standard for a few-"
Emotionally scarred post-Doom in the Tomb HS players: "NO!"
As for the BGs changes, I'm not sure if +2/+1 is enough of a nerf; the power comes more from affecting all minion types. Still, nerfing +Health is more impactful than +Attack. If Blizzard keeps updating BGs relatively quickly, as they have been, then these small, iterative changes can work. If it's not enough of a nerf, keep going until it is.
I'm excited to try King Bagurgle, though I forgot what the other new minion will be. I have no idea who the heroes will be, either, but I hope they're interesting and worthy of consideration when picking.
Anduin, Aggro Annihilator (though this card is harder to trigger without Taunt).
Think there'll be any decks that buff the crap out of their minions? If so, this could be pretty good. I'll be honest, I'm not even sure summoning a copy would keep its buffs - my instinct says "No", and if so, then it'd only be worth copying minions with strong Deathrattles or persistent effects, or ones with huge base stats. So... probably an average card, another tool in Priest's back pocket.
There seems to be a lot of slower, Control-oriented cards in DoD. Swapping the cost of a beefy late-game minion with a 2- or 3-cost spell or minion is one of the best outcomes for this card. However, it goes both ways. Most spells that you'd include in your deck are on the cheap side (let's say, at or below 5 Mana), and having a key removal or combo spell's cost increased because of bad luck would be pretty frustrating. I don't think it'll have enough reliable upside to put in your deck.
I'm not sure about this card yet. If Hunter can consistently build strong early-game boards with at least 1 Dragon in them, then the amount of pressure Stormhammer provides is scary. However, there aren't a plethora of cheap Dragons, so we must also consider how good it'd be in the mid- to late-game. 3 damage is a nice amount for that extra push to remove a must-kill minion or get through a Taunt, but you're taking damage to do it. In the late-game, where Dragons should be at their strongest, repeated 3 damage to face can help end the game if you have ways to get through any Taunts that might be played.
There's also the Ubiquity Paradox: the stronger a weapon is (and, thus, the more it's played), the weaker it becomes due to an increase of easy, cheap weapon removal techs.
I'll just say I'd be more surprised to see this in fast decks than as part of a finisher for slower decks.
Doomsayer, but better for anti-Aggro purposes. Rare instead of Epic, comes down a Turn earlier, not easy to remove if played immediately. Worse than Doomsayer in the mid/late-game, assuming you can protect Doomsayer for a turn, but I daresay Doomsayer was most often played on Turn 2 or 3 against Aggro.
As of November 30th, still no Shaman Galakrond reveal. Judging by the rest of the set, I feel like it's going to have a slower effect, suited for Control. Might interact with Overload. We'll see...!