Hearthstone 8: At the end of this thread, resummon all friendly posters.

[Tectonic Robot]

...why is it showing up with the debuff/buff coloring on the mana cost and stats? That, to me, says that something's wonky. If the cost/stats had actually been adjusted, wouldn't they just be white numbers?

If it is legit, it probably got released early accidentally, and right now the graphicall difference is the debuff coloring.

Or; They could just be testing it out right now.

[Hamste]

So, what are the chances this makes hunters near unplayable in constructed? Their cards are based around synergy and not having cards/the ability to cycle is a big hit to synergy.

[Zevox]

So, what are the chances this makes hunters near unplayable in constructed? Their cards are based around synergy and not having cards/the ability to cycle is a big hit to synergy.

Not sure. Pre-Naxx I'd have said it was pretty likely, since Hunters have previously all but vanished each time Unleash was nerfed, and this would be a change closer to the significance of the original nerf to it than the second. But post-Naxx I've heard some Hunters have tried dropping Unleash and Buzzard and had it work, so maybe they can survive it.

They'd still probably vanish from popular use for a while, though. The second Unleash nerf didn't really hurt Hunters that much, but people still reacted as if they had been made unplayable again for a little while. I'd expect a similar reaction to a change like this.

[CarpeGuitarrem]

If it got released accidentally, it's probably not actually going to be a 5-mana 3/2 when they finish testing. They probably have a sort of playtesting thing rigged together that lets them adjust the costs and stuff of cards and try them out without actually changing them in the game.

And "over-cost it" sounds like a first step for playtesting.

[Kish]

I'm inclined to think "Photoshopped hoax."

(Is there even such a thing as a 5-cost 3/2 in the game now? *browses some 5-cost cards on Hearthhead* If someone at Blizzard thinks "draw a card whenever you summon a beast" is equal to +1 Spell Damage, draw a card, and 1 attack/2 health, the difference between being class and being neutral thrown in gratis, they need a better quality of alcohol there.)

[ShinyRocks]

Curious Plays Of Our Time:

I play Murloc Tidehunter and use Hungry Crab on the Scout. Opponent ... uses Naturalize on the Hungry Crab.

I win barely half the matches, and it's probably not objectively good, but I have more fun with a Murlock deck than pretty much anything else.

[Rosstin]

I think it's real. Hunter is so OP right now.

[ex cathedra]

...why is it showing up with the debuff/buff coloring on the mana cost and stats? That, to me, says that something's wonky. If the cost/stats had actually been adjusted, wouldn't they just be white numbers?

This also happened the last time they nerfed UTH. I suspect it's because the server-side numbers for the cards now differ from the client-side data

[Gandariel]

I had actually made a Uth- and Buzzard- less Hunter deck a few posts ago, and it does fare pretty well.

I don't *think* these changes are gonna happen, and i don't really think the meta needs it. Control warrior has been one of the top decks of the meta since forever and nobody said anything about that.

[ex cathedra]

http://us.battle.net/hearthstone/en/.../14279128810#1

[Destro_Yersul]

That'll set Hunter Aggro back a bit, and Leeroy is slightly less good now. I don't think Leeroy will really go away, but it will probably take a bit more effort to set up the kill with him.

[Anarion]

These changes are probably fine, but I dislike their design philosophy.

Fighting for board control and battles between minions make an overall game of Hearthstone more fun and compelling, but taking 20+ damage in one turn is not particularly fun or interactive.

That basically says that anything that comes straight out of the hand can't be too strong, anything with charge can't be too strong, any combo setups can't be too strong. Heaven forbid I kill my opponent by surprise because he neither sets up defenses nor kills me quick enough.

[Kish]

Well, that's certainly...yeah.

Goodbye, Buzzard! It was nice knowing you! You didn't put hunters in the top tier of Legend decks by any means so I'm not sure why you're now so hideously overcosted!

[Tectonic Robot]

Well, I have a regular Bloodmage Thalnos now. Nice to know that hole in my Legendary list has been filled. *grumble grumble*

[CarpeGuitarrem]

These changes are probably fine, but I dislike their design philosophy.



That basically says that anything that comes straight out of the hand can't be too strong, anything with charge can't be too strong, any combo setups can't be too strong. Heaven forbid I kill my opponent by surprise because he neither sets up defenses nor kills me quick enough.

I can accept that as a design philosophy. They want to see decks that can perform consistently instead of fishing for a win condition. Basically, they've prioritized board dominance as the core of the game, and want you to be fighting back and forth for control of the board. So, if there's going to be massive-damage turns, they'll be closer to when a Shaman builds a full board and Bloodlusts for game over.

Ultimately, I see this as the same decision behind the action they took against Freeze Mages, because those decks were also seen as "non-interactive".

[Kish]

I kind of think if they want to do that, they should redesign all their currently-all-about-burst cards to be not-bursty-but-still-comparably-useful-in-the-game-they're-going-for, not leave them pretty much as they are mechanically and inflate their cost to the point where they're no longer practical.

But I suppose it works as long as you can get the dust back for a card that's no longer useful. As long as they're planning for the demoralizing effect of people having to relearn the game and design new decks for it semiregularly (and, in fact, they may well be counting on this to facilitate new players breaking in to the game).

[CarpeGuitarrem]

I mean, I do think that this is a wild overcosting.

But I don't think they're about to eliminate burst. They just don't want a burst that can annihilate someone in one turn unless they've already taken so much damage. 12-15 damage in a burst? Probably fine by their count, because you have to keep a foothold on the board to kill someone with that.

[Kish]

Ironically, the buzzard would be way less completely nerfed if those stats were arranged in a way most people usually think of as worse. Like 2/3. Or 1/4. Or, hell, 0/5; who summons a buzzard to fight anyway?

[Xondoure]

Part of me understands Leeroy getting nerfed because he's so meta altering, but the other part of me feels that changing him isn't the solution. First off, he actually has a very balancing effect on the game. Things like Control Warrior and Handlock cost so much dust to produce that you have to put an insane amount of money/hours in to get anywhere. Meanwhile Leeroy is one card and with him all sorts of decks open up that are otherwise fairly cheap. Lose that and it becomes a lot harder for players to break through the barrier.

Buzzards is not the nerf Hunter needs. There just needs to be a neutral creature that burns secrets like Ooze burns weapons and everything would be fine.

I mean, I do think that this is a wild overcosting.

But I don't think they're about to eliminate burst. They just don't want a burst that can annihilate someone in one turn unless they've already taken so much damage. 12-15 damage in a burst? Probably fine by their count, because you have to keep a foothold on the board to kill someone with that.

The problem I think is that if they are so focused on the game playing one way, and being winnable one way then they'll only make the meta more condensed and same feeling. Which is sort of the opposite of what it should be I think. Especially since we have a meta in arena that's more focused on board control and certain classes already dominate it. There's no balance to be had.

[CantigThimble]

It seems like a much better way to emphasize board control would be to make Buzzard a 3/2 for 2 that drew a card the first time you played a beast each turn. It's pretty good and encourages you to keep it on the field turn after turn rather than just one. I'm sure that's not the best design for buzzard but hell that took me 15 seconds and I'm pretty mediocre at the game. It seems incredibly obvious that they could make it far more playable than a friggin 3/2 for FIVE while still removing it's burst potential.

[Forbiddenwar]

Seriously if they wanted to balance buzzard card draw blizzard needs to just change the hounds to not be beasts. . .

Which is something I said back in March. I feel the best balance is a 2 mana unleash the hounds but hounds aren't beasts.

[Anxe]

It seems like a much better way to emphasize board control would be to make Buzzard a 3/2 for 2 that drew a card the first time you played a beast each turn. It's pretty good and encourages you to keep it on the field turn after turn rather than just one. I'm sure that's not the best design for buzzard but hell that took me 15 seconds and I'm pretty mediocre at the game. It seems incredibly obvious that they could make it far more playable than a friggin 3/2 for FIVE while still removing it's burst potential.

Too good for a 2 mana cost. Compare it to Mana Tide Totem. I still like that idea better than 5 mana cost though. The Buzzard is going to be starving to be in my deck now.

[Kish]

It just occurred to me that if they're going to do this, they should really refund the dust for Snake Trap too. You know, because suddenly the only card it really had noticeable synergy with is nearly useless.

[Zevox]

http://us.battle.net/hearthstone/en/.../14279128810#1

Well, color me shocked.

Well, that makes the Buzzard all but unplayable. Maybe at some point in the future we'll see someone invent a viable Hunter deck that can play slow enough to make it usable in its new form, but I doubt it. More likely I think this'll turn into another Unleash the Hounds situation, where they later change it again, dropping the cost to something more reasonable. No guesses on how long that'll take, though.

The Leeroy change is saner and less significant, though. It'll have a big impact on Miracle Rogue, now that Leeroy double Shadowstep can no longer be done in a single turn. Not sure whether that'll kill the deck entirely though, since I've certainly seen them win with damage spread out over a couple of turns before, so I don't think they're necessarily dependant on a single-turn combo. And I do like how it renders Leeroy + PO + Faceless impossible in Handlock - always ticked me off to have a good match with a Handlock, be winning for most of it, then lose to that combo because I'd taken one hit from a Giant and he'd used a Hellfire or some such. Overall though, I think those two will be the decks most affected by it - others don't really need Leeroy at that specific mana cost.

[Mystic Muse]

Why is it that when misdirection redirects an attack from a minion of yours into you, and you have a weapon, it deals weapon damage to that minion?

[Zevox]

Why is it that when misdirection redirects an attack from a minion of yours into you, and you have a weapon, it deals weapon damage to that minion?

Because the way weapons work is by giving your hero an attack score. They deactivate during your opponent's turn, so that they don't automatically deal damage to enemies that attack you, but if your minion gets forced to attack you on your turn, it's functionally the same as if they ran into another minion with that attack score.

[Mystic Muse]

Because the way weapons work is by giving your hero an attack score. They deactivate during your opponent's turn, so that they don't automatically deal damage to enemies that attack you, but if your minion gets forced to attack you on your turn, it's functionally the same as if they ran into another minion with that attack score.

Huh. Wish this didn't happen, but I guess it's never going to change, so I'll just drop it.

[Nerocite]

I know there are some Hunter decks that don't run the Buzzad/UTH combo, so I'm not sure how much this will change the meta.

[CantigThimble]

Too good for a 2 mana cost. Compare it to Mana Tide Totem. I still like that idea better than 5 mana cost though. The Buzzard is going to be starving to be in my deck now.

I don't think it's comparable to mana tide, it's not gaurenteed a draw and to get similar value levels you need to slow down your play of normally very cheap minions, still it might be better at 2/2 or 3 mana.

Weapons give your hero an attack value during your turn, just like minions. So they deal retaliation damage the same way.

Wow, double ninja'd. I must be slipping.

[Anxe]

It just occurred to me that if they're going to do this, they should really refund the dust for Snake Trap too. You know, because suddenly the only card it really had noticeable synergy with is nearly useless.

It still synergizes with Tundra Wolf and Scavenging Hyena. Cult Master too. You play any of those the turn after the Snake Trap activates and you'll get some value.