Hearthstone: Heroes of Warcraft V3 - The Argent Tournament is GETTING IN HERE *Uhuhuhuh*
5,000 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Linkuya;48765470][t]http://i.imgur.com/ssAYS55.png[/t]
First try, wish I could do that in game too.[/QUOTE]
I can teach you the ancient ways of Bullshit Portal Draws if you want.
3 Esports out of 5 tries.
:snip:
You know I really hate twitch chat but Hearthstone's is always amusing.
[t]http://i.imgur.com/R5W34wV.jpg[/t]
[sp]Went 0-3 in Arena. The last Arena I played I went 12-2.[/sp]
[QUOTE=Mr_Awesome;48765926][t]http://i.imgur.com/R5W34wV.jpg[/t]
[sp]Went 0-3 in Arena. The last Arena I played I went 12-2.[/sp][/QUOTE]
CITIZENS OF DALARAN
[QUOTE=Mr_Awesome;48765926][t]http://i.imgur.com/R5W34wV.jpg[/t]
[sp]Went 0-3 in Arena. The last Arena I played I went 12-2.[/sp][/QUOTE]
arena in a nutshell
[QUOTE=JCDentonUNATCO;48765549]You know I really hate twitch chat but Hearthstone's is always amusing.[/QUOTE]
The copy pasta in Kripps chat used to be pretty quality. The old 'I AM THE EAT BEAST' pasta used to always get me. I feel like it's gotten shittier tho, which is an accomplishment for twitch chat tbh.
Soooo apparently Effigy triggers when an opponent's Anima Golem dies due to no other minions being on the board.
:suicide:
[url]http://www.heartharena.com/overwolf[/url]
Pretty cool app. Integrates HearthArena into your game! ADWCTA and Merps are showcasing it [URL="http://www.twitch.tv/adwcta"]right now in their draft[/URL]! Also it's not out yet but whatever!
..And there goes heroic BRM
[t]http://i.imgur.com/sbqfWqn.png[/t]
armor counts towards the new brawl's health difference, fuck this
[t]http://i.imgur.com/Wbx9MNS.jpg[/t]
ram wrangler value
[QUOTE=Damjen;48763200]Because something something money.[/QUOTE]
Blizzard has stated multiple times that they prefer nerfing cards as a last case scenario when they feel they affect the game in some way they deem unacceptable. They prefer instead attempting to give players the tools to adapt to the meta through tech cards (with varying results) and stepping in to alter cards when they are absolutely sure of the decision.
The mindset that Blizzard doesen't nerf cards because of financial reasons is dubious at best. If cards are too powerful and meta defining it's more ideal to nerf them as they might negatively affect the meta. People won't want to buy new packs and adventures if it doesn't contest or improve the best list (y'all know what I'm alluding to). This is the reasoning for the nerfs behind cards like Undertaker (deckbuilding revolving around low curve deathrattle decks, restricting deckbuilding and future card creation). On the flipside if Blizzard were to nerf cards as quickly as people request this would create an environment where players aren't given incentive to invest time/money to make meta decks or counter meta decks. Why bother trying if things are going to be changed anyway? Whats the point of a meta game at all? This is a "something something money" issue, but it's an issue that would stem from if Blizzard tried to satisfy the communities nerf happy nature.
[QUOTE=Damjen;48763200]Blizzard most likely entirely stopped nerfing cards.[/QUOTE]
Ben Brode has acknowledged player gripes regarding Patron and stated that they're "keeping an eye on it" (the same thing they said about Undertaker) and that the Charge mechanic is often the most difficult to balance.
[QUOTE=General;48771793]When does the season end?[/QUOTE]
Day after last day of the month.
So you have, counting today, Four days to get serious in ranked before next season. As well as hit level 20 so you can get the card back, which I shall remind you, is the Exodar.
[t]http://jukegames.es/kcfinder-2.51/upload/images/hearthstone_header_season_18.jpg[/t]
[QUOTE=Archimedes;48769928]The mindset that Blizzard doesen't nerf cards because of financial reasons is dubious at best. If cards are too powerful and meta defining it's more ideal to nerf them as they might negatively affect the meta.[/QUOTE]
but at the same time you've got to consider that some of the strongest cards are in the adventures, and nerfing them would mean less incentive to buy those.
naxx has haunted creeper, nerubian egg, unstable ghoul, sludge belcher, loatheb, webspinner, voidcaller, zombie chow, deathlord, mad scientist and avenge, while brm has grim patron, gang up, quick shot, imp gang boss, flamewaker and thaurissan
all the cards i listed are core in certain decks, and some of them are essential in multiple decks. with the adventures costing a whopping 700g [I]per wing[/I] and with no price reduction in sight i think "because something something money" is a fair bet
I got to rank 11
Do I lose my chest if I de rank up to 15?
-merge-
[QUOTE=General;48771808]I got to rank 11
Do I lose my chest if I de rank up to 15?[/QUOTE]
Nope, you get a chest for your highest rank of a season, regardless of what it will be at the end of it.
For example, if I got to rank 1 and would drop all the way to rank 20, I'd still get a rank 1 chest.
4 handlocks in a row, 2 golden. Fuck this brawl man.
[editline]27th September 2015[/editline]
5th handlock :)
Still mad as hell that no one uses Casual to actually try something new.
I just want to escape the Handlocks, Riddler Paladins and Patron Warriors for a second.
[QUOTE=Sandvich9;48772114]Still mad as hell that no one uses Casual to actually try something new.
I just want to escape the Handlocks, Riddler Paladins and Patron Warriors for a second.[/QUOTE]
I play Murloc paladin in Casual if that makes you happy.
[QUOTE=Zukriuchen;48771807]but at the same time you've got to consider that some of the strongest cards are in the adventures, and nerfing them would mean less incentive to buy those.
naxx has haunted creeper, nerubian egg, unstable ghoul, sludge belcher, loatheb, webspinner, voidcaller, zombie chow, deathlord, mad scientist and avenge, while brm has grim patron, gang up, quick shot, imp gang boss, flamewaker and thaurissan
all the cards i listed are core in certain decks, and some of them are essential in multiple decks. with the adventures costing a whopping 700g [I]per wing[/I] and with no price reduction in sight i think "because something something money" is a fair bet[/QUOTE]
I don't fully get this arguement because the vast majority of the cards you listed aren't widely considered imblanaced outside of weird salty fringe groups. They're just really strong which is fairly typical for adventures (less so now though, I'd say Naxx was slightly stronger in power level than what we'll ever get now). A few of the cards (specifically the Naxx stuff for now: Unstable Ghoul, Voidcaller, Deathlord, Avenge) didn't see consistent play until recent expansions which shifted their power level and even then some only exist in those lists. Obviously stuff like Mad Scientist is obnoxious and sits on the borderline but Blizzard has specified that they feel if that type of card is only powerful in its one archetype ("Secret" Decks) they're fine with it being strong. One card that was a problem was the afore mentioned Undertaker, who was promptly nerfed after a period of monitoring by Blizzard.
That last bit about 700g isn't really a balance issue either. Yeah it sucks that it's more inaccessible for newer players but I really don't think "something something money" is really the reason they're holding back on altering the expansions cost or content.
I'm not trying to come in and shit on everyones opinion of balance, but considering how consistently open Blizzard has been about design philosophy (Ben Brodes even posted a blog of sorts on the official Hearthstone channel discussing insights into the design process and hopes to do more) I feel that trying to personify them (specifically Team 5) as a greedy, apathetic developer team who'd rather let the game balance go to shit in order to make a quick buck is a rather big leap that involves blocking out everything that doesn't specifically cater to that mindset. Team 5 wants to make money. The best way to make money is to make sure the community is mostly contended. I don't fully support some of the design decisions by Team 5 but they've DO acknowledge player complaints, it just happens very slowly and caters to things they factor in to be legitimate problems.
I'm Linkuya#1965 NA is anyone wants to play decks for funsies and the like.
I take my goofy decks and the like to casual for a break from ranked and it's ranked 2.0.
Man I'm just stuck at rank 11
Anyone got a deck that might help me?
[QUOTE=General;48772986]Man I'm just stuck at rank 11
Anyone got a deck that might help me?[/QUOTE]
what decks are you playing?
personally I've been having a lot of luck (and fun too, how shocking!) as oil rouge
[QUOTE=General;48772986]Man I'm just stuck at rank 11
Anyone got a deck that might help me?[/QUOTE]
As far as I know [URL="https://tempostorm.com/hearthstone/meta-snapshot/meta-snapshot-30-whose-ladder-is-it-anyway"]this[/URL] is the best tier list for rankeds.
Been trying control hunter and heal priest
But I dunno I seem to win a few then lose a few
Stuck like that
[QUOTE=Archimedes;48772434]I don't fully get this arguement because the vast majority of the cards you listed aren't widely considered imblanaced outside of weird salty fringe groups. They're just really strong which is fairly typical for adventures (less so now though, I'd say Naxx was slightly stronger in power level than what we'll ever get now). A few of the cards (specifically the Naxx stuff for now: Unstable Ghoul, Voidcaller, Deathlord, Avenge) didn't see consistent play until recent expansions which shifted their power level and even then some only exist in those lists. Obviously stuff like Mad Scientist is obnoxious and sits on the borderline but Blizzard has specified that they feel if that type of card is only powerful in its one archetype ("Secret" Decks) they're fine with it being strong. One card that was a problem was the afore mentioned Undertaker, who was promptly nerfed after a period of monitoring by Blizzard.
That last bit about 700g isn't really a balance issue either. Yeah it sucks that it's more inaccessible for newer players but I really don't think "something something money" is really the reason they're holding back on altering the expansions cost or content.
I'm not trying to come in and shit on everyones opinion of balance, but considering how consistently open Blizzard has been about design philosophy (Ben Brodes even posted a blog of sorts on the official Hearthstone channel discussing insights into the design process and hopes to do more) I feel that trying to personify them (specifically Team 5) as a greedy, apathetic developer team who'd rather let the game balance go to shit in order to make a quick buck is a rather big leap that involves blocking out everything that doesn't specifically cater to that mindset. Team 5 wants to make money. The best way to make money is to make sure the community is mostly contended. I don't fully support some of the design decisions by Team 5 but they've DO acknowledge player complaints, it just happens very slowly and caters to things they factor in to be legitimate problems.[/QUOTE]
i'm talking about how blizzard not nerfing cards for money reasons isn't "dubious" like you said (unless i misread that whole thing). my point is not that they're overpowered, just that they're solid cards - with a $25 price tag on them. this is already a pretty greedy scheme on its own. regular, non-adventure cards aren't as bad but the disenchanting system is still pretty terrible
now i'm not saying everyone on the dev team is looking for nothing but money, i'm sure there's lots of passionate people working there, it's just that nerfing cards has to be both a gameplay and marketing decision. when something like undertaker comes around, you have to think about how long you can leave it in without gameplay suffering so much that it becomes bad marketing, but nerfing it too quickly might feel like a slap in the face to the people who spent real money for it (personally i think 6 months is way too long)
and again, i'm not saying money is the only reason but i'm sure it plays a big part. don't know how you can say that them not altering the adventures' gold prices has nothing to do with money though
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
