Hearthstone 23: The Evil League of EVIL

[Stevesciguy]

Yeah, so... Pirate Warrior is back in force.

I can't remember the names of the cards, but we have:

2/2/2 Neutral Pirate
Card Text: When you play a Pirate, summon this from your hand.

3/2/5 Warrior Mech
Card Text: When you summon a Pirate, deal 2 damage to a random enemy.

4/4/2 Neutral Pirate
Battlecry: Equip one of your destroyed weapons.

1/1/2 Warrior Pirate
Battlecry: Add a random Pirate to your hand.

Everyone run for your lives

[Eurus]

Wait, is it actually a Pirate and a Mech, or is it just a Mech whose effect cares about Pirates?

[Stevesciguy]

Wait, is it actually a Pirate and a Mech, or is it just a Mech whose effect cares about Pirates?

Oops, typo. I meant to type Warrior Mech. It is just a mech whose effect cares about pirates

[Rynjin]

Oh, I can think of quite a few things. Such as a card being made whose very existence hard counters your favorite deck in the game's history, and which isn't even understatted. More than once.

Have you considered playing a different deck for once? I cannot understand the appeal of playing the same deck expansion after expansion, year after year. Control Warrior has had the same matchups and decision points at any given round since 2015 at this point.

It's just kind of bizarre, IMO, that your entire judging of whether a set or a change or anything is good is whether it affects the single deck you play, ignoring the fact that there are a lot of people out there who want new stuff to play with and new mechanics to try, so the game can't protect a niche forever. And it's not like if Control Warrior is pushed out of the meta for now it's gone forever, that's one of the perennial decks, like Zoolock or Face Hunter. It always comes back.

Not that this card is likely to push it out of the meta. Or affect it at all. Warrior is likely to push ITSELF out of the meta as the aggro variants are likely to be more popular.

Maybe the reason you haven't enjoyed the game in years is because you're stuck in a rut? Even your favorite thing can get stale after a while. Would you eat your favorite meal every day, or watch your favorite movie on loop without getting tired of it?

[Zevox]

Have you considered playing a different deck for once?

I do play other decks, although there's been a short supply of ones that interest me this year. Quest Shaman and Quest Druid, before the wild card event ruined both of them. N'Zoth Priest was the only one during the event. Control Shaman during Rise of Shadows.

But that doesn't mean I stop caring about Control Warrior. It's the only deck that I can remotely count on continuing to exist over time at this point, since all the things they've done to the Classic set have left really only it and Zoolock as the big recurring decks over time, and it happens to be my overall favorite (alongside old Handlock, which is sadly dead and, at this point, too weak for wild use). So yeah, when they mess with that, it matters to me, a lot.

It's just kind of bizarre, IMO, that your entire judging of whether a set or a change or anything is good is whether it affects the single deck you play,

It's not. This particular card is very specifically directed at it, so it's what I comment on for this. But if you think that's all I care about, you've clearly forgotten my reactions to everything they've done to the classic set - War Axe and Equality may be the two I hated the most, but I was no fan of any of them, including when they gutted Mana Wyrm, a card that would never be in a deck I'd play.

Maybe the reason you haven't enjoyed the game in years is because you're stuck in a rut?

Definitely not, no. I did enjoy Control Warrior and Shaman earlier this year, and Quest Shaman and Druid more recently - and, to a lesser extent, N'Zoth Priest and my brief attempts at a N'Zoth Rogue and Highlander Paladin. It's just always right around the corner that Blizzard will do something I hate to make things less fun though, it seems, and I am sick of that.

Even your favorite thing can get stale after a while. Would you eat your favorite meal every day, or watch your favorite movie on loop without getting tired of it?

I don't watch movies enough to even contemplate the latter. I actually don't find that I ever get tired of my favorite food though, no matter how often I eat it. Always baffles me when my parents say they don't want to eat something because they had it the other day or the like, that's weird to me.

[Stevesciguy]

I don't watch movies enough to even contemplate the latter. I actually don't find that I ever get tired of my favorite food though, no matter how often I eat it. Always baffles me when my parents say they don't want to eat something because they had it the other day or the like, that's weird to me.

Gotta agree. In high school, I ordered the same thing for lunch every day for 4 years. And that wasn't even my favorite food.

[Zevox]

Gotta agree. In high school, I ordered the same thing for lunch every day for 4 years. And that wasn't even my favorite food.

Oh yeah, High School was that way for me too. I just brought a peanut butter sandwich every day. Which is not my favorite food, but it stayed good from morning until lunch and meant that I didn't need to stand in line and pay for food from the cafeteria. Continued to do that for my lunch break throughout my time at my first job too, in fact.

Actually, I think I've always tended towards eating the same thing continuously for long stretches of time. There were periods when I was a kid when my lunch almost every day for a year or more was one type of sandwich that I really liked (chicken or grilled cheese being the two that most stick out in my mind), to the point where both my mom and my friend's mom would joke that I'd "turn into" one of those sandwiches.

[Tvtyrant]

As someone from a family that struggles with food addiction, I think it really depends on what you insist on eating all the time. If it is because you don't care what it tastes like and just want nutrients/not to be hungry it is fine, if it because everything that isn't oiled and sugared tastes bad it is problematic.

Like I eat beans or greek yogurt as my staple foods now, once upon a time it was frozen pizza or hot pockets.

[Rynjin]

I don't watch movies enough to even contemplate the latter. I actually don't find that I ever get tired of my favorite food though, no matter how often I eat it. Always baffles me when my parents say they don't want to eat something because they had it the other day or the like, that's weird to me.

Is it weird to want to not have the same experience repeatedly? Variety is the spice of life, as they say.

I cannot bear monotony, more than anything else.

[Zevox]

Is it weird to want to not have the same experience repeatedly? Variety is the spice of life, as they say.

I cannot bear monotony, more than anything else.

That is not a saying that I find I agree with very much, personally, and I often find it's one touted by people with very different tastes than mine. If I genuinely like something, I can enjoy it repeatedly for a very long time, and often do. And when I do move on to something else, the feeling is less often "I'm sick of this and want to do something different" and more often "hey, that other thing sounds fun today instead." I didn't stop playing Dragon Ball FighterZ a few weeks ago because I'd gotten tired of it after playing for around a month, for instance, I did so because Battlegrounds went open beta and got my attention, and I knew I'd be transitioning away from it soon when BBTag's 2.0 update happened anyway. That's just how my enjoyment of things works.

[CarpeGuitarrem]

Have we gone and tallied prediction stuff yet? I forget even that happens.

[Stevesciguy]

Wow! Big changes:

Echo has been nerfed. Copies created by Echo can no longer be reduced below 1. Sn1plock has been defeated, everyone.

They're adding wild packs back into the in-game store! Great for f2p wild players like me.

We're getting a new adventure... but it's like the adventures of old! 35 new cards in Galakrond's Awakening, which we'll hear more about later.

New Battlegrounds heroes. Edwin, Sylvanas, and Rafaam are here and ready for some fightin'.

Here's the full post:
https://playhearthstone.com/en-us/bl...00000009378056

[heronbpv]

@Regarding the tally:
No, not yet. And Trump has already made his Trump reviews Trump reviews video. I believe we're waiting on @Gandariel on this one. Time to inject some larva to speed up his spawning!

@Patch notes:
Just saw Regis' video on that. Holy cow, that's sweet! So instead of bringing wild cards back to the fold, we'll be given new cards, old-school-adventures style! Plus the BG changes, too.
And the Doom in the Tomb cards are out, so hooray for a sane standard meta, again! Well, before the madness of the next expansion, that is.

[Zevox]

Coming Soon – Galakrond’s Awakening:

The final battle in the Year of the Dragon’s solo adventure story is Galakrond’s Awakening, coming this January! We won’t spoil too much, but we hope you’re ready to battle E.V.I.L. (or good) and collect 35 new cards! More details on Galakrond’s Awakening will be coming soon.

...well. If that means what it looks like it means, I now know when I will definitely stop engaging with standard Hearthstone. Because if they're going to start making these mid-expansion single-player adventures include new cards you can't get elsewhere but leave the cost for them where it has been, then that effectively means to me that they're doubling the number of expansions they're putting out, and expecting us to pay for one way or the other, per year. (Because you know that if this goes over well the first time it will become a regular thing, just like the mid-expansion adventures have.) And I am not okay with that.

These were fine when they were treated the same way as new expansions were back in the day. The newer ones have been fine because it's been possible for me to ignore them and not feel penalized for doing so. But if they're putting the two approaches together, that is not fine, and I am done with non-Battlegrounds Hearthstone after it starts.

But speaking of, on happier news, the Battlegrounds stuff! I like the look of it. All good choices on which heroes to rotate out this time (though I still really question why they feel the need to keep the number of heroes that are available to the same specific total, personally), they're almost certainly the five weakest, aside from maybe arguably Jaraxxus or Finley over Pyramad and/or Bartendotron. And the new additions look good. Sylvanas' hero power is a cool alternative to selling minions, Edwin's is a very solid looking buff effect, and Rafaam's is very interesting and unique, with a lot of potential for high rolling and the worst-case being that it just refunds its cost. I like the changes to Millificent and Lich Baz'hial too, should make the latter much more solid. Millificent I half think might wind up on the weak side with hers, but worth finding out if it just makes her reasonable instead.

Speaking of, the nerfs to other heroes look fair. I don't know that Patchwerk's was really necessary, but eh, he's a boring hero anyway, so whatever. The Rat King and AF Kay's both look reasonable and should leave them both still good, just less so than before. Though I can't help thinking that with them nerfed, we're going to wind up with a clear top 2 best heroes in The Curator and Brann now, since those three (and Millificent before they rotated her out, and is now returning nerfed) were their biggest competition for the top spot. (And Nefarian I guess, but he's kept down a bit by his hero power not helping early.) But maybe one of the newcomers will wind up alongside them or something.

Lightfang nerf seems reasonable - it'll still be a very strong card, but things that it buffs won't be quite so sturdy over time anymore, should be a very noticeable impact on getting him early. Though it does mean that the scales will probably tip heavily towards Brann Bronzebeard as the tool of choice to win in the long game now. He was already arguably a bit better than Lightfang as long as you had a Menarie composition with at least one Amalgam thanks to how potent he made Menagerie Magician, and with the right amount of Amalgams/Murlocs Coldlight Oracle and Megasaur, so Lightfang getting nerfed but him being left alone means he is likely now just clearly best.

But we also go those new additions, and holy moly, that King Bagurgle. Murlocs are probably going to be one of, if not the top strategy with his addition to things, because he is bonkers, and works with Brann. Floating Watcher is tame by comparison, but still might be a strong addition for demons - I mean, as a tier 3 minion that goes great with the tier 1 Demon cards (Wrath Weaver, Vulgar Homunculus), it could shore up that composition's mid-game strength, which is one area where it felt lacking. Might not be strong enough for the very late game to push Demons into top contention, but that remains to be seen. I have had a couple of first-place finishes with Demons recently that made me wonder if I've been underestimating them (specifically off the back of the Soul Juggler/Void Lord/Mal'ganis combination), so maybe this surprises everyone and is the boost they need. Will be interesting to see how it goes.

[Joran]

A data scientist for Blizzard has been posting about Battlegrounds MMR and where you stand (as part of a discussion about normalizing MMR and how they nerfed the MMR gains if you're at the top of the MMR)

So for reference:

If you're above 5500 MMR, you are in the top 1%. (top 1.7% if you remove anyone who's played fewer than 25 games)

If you're above 5000 MMR, you are in the top 3.3% of players. (top 7% if you remove anyone who's played fewer than 25 games)

If you're above 4300 MMR right now, you are in the top 20%. (top 33% if you remove anyone who's played fewer than 25 games)

My thinking was skewed because all the streamers I watch are above 7-8K so I thought aiming for 6K was a pretty reasonable goal. I'm at 5.8K MMR right now, so I guess I'm in the 1%.

https://www.reddit.com/r/hearthstone...s_mmr_updates/

They kind of goofed and shipped the MMR decreases before they could normalize the MMR ratings, but they're trying to make it so MMR rating at the top isn't determined mainly by how much someone plays.

Basically, if you're in a lobby with people worse than you, you'll win fewer points for a win and lose more points if you lose. This supposedly won't impact people in the 3000-5000 MMR range at all, since they're matched well already.

For me, I got second yesterday and still gained 80 some MMR, so I didn't notice much of a difference.

The primary issue is that now there's zero incentive for any player at 8000+ to play on their main accounts, so, you're bound to see popular streamers either level alts or switch back to Standard.

To add on to this, we have a plan to "reset" high MMR values and will be deployed in the near future. The change will likely hit top 1% of the player base (that is, rating > 5500) . We are not doing a full reset (to 4000) because that would be bad for matchmaking.

[heronbpv]

Holy cow, that explains something then. I plateaued at 6500 before nosediving back to 5900, and now back again to 6033. What a ride! The ass kicking was real, although this is also in part me being poor at transitioning from 3 stars onward. No idea why, but after realizing the default strategy for the early game (buy on turn 1 - lvl on 2 - sell/buy on 3 - buy/buy on 4 - buy/lvl on 5), I do think I somehow got worse, though I can't explain why. Maybe I'm just being inflexible? Also, misplaying/misreading some more aggressive "lvl up for lightfang" strategies (note to self: never do it again with a damn mecharoo. For three turns. While getting murdered...).
But hey, in reality I'm still this high the ladder? Not half bad, me. Just when I thought I was just a pleb (lol) and 6k was the regular level (meaning I was hugely under performing), the reality is it's just that my view was skewed thanks to streamers? Feels rank 5, man! :P

[Joran]

Holy cow, that explains something then. I plateaued at 6500 before nosediving back to 5900, and now back again to 6033. What a ride! The ass kicking was real, although this is also in part me being poor at transitioning from 3 stars onward. No idea why, but after realizing the default strategy for the early game (buy on turn 1 - lvl on 2 - sell/buy on 3 - buy/buy on 4 - buy/lvl on 5), I do think I somehow got worse, though I can't explain why. Maybe I'm just being inflexible? Also, misplaying/misreading some more aggressive "lvl up for lightfang" strategies (note to self: never do it again with a damn mecharoo. For three turns. While getting murdered...).
But hey, in reality I'm still this high the ladder? Not half bad, me. Just when I thought I was just a pleb (lol) and 6k was the regular level (meaning I was hugely under performing), the reality is it's just that my view was skewed thanks to streamers? Feels rank 5, man! :P

I think for me, my issues are being pretty inflexible with my builds. I have an idea "this card is good, this card is bad", try to draft only good cards. So I skip over things like Shredders, mechs with divine shields or even things like Bolvar in hunt for the "good cards" like Amalgam, battlecry buffers, or Cobalt Guardian.

I don't do a great job either of evaluating "where did I mess up?" or did I get unlucky?

I just hit 6000 with 118 mmr gain from a first place finish. Rafaam is pretty broken. In the game, I got the Murloc Tidecaller, which paired with my other Tidecaller. I went full Murloc, picked up a Primalfin from another player which gave me the King.

I kind of stalled at level 5 after hard rolling for triples looking for the Megasaur, but picked up a Zapp which got me Brann from the hero power. I was still low since I didn't get much to buff Murlocs, so I went for the Hail Mary and level to 6 and got two Megasaurs on my first roll. Brann + Megasaur*2 = 5 Murlocs with Divine Shield and Poisonous and it was dumb after that. If the Murlocs hit the nuts, it's impossible to beat.

[heronbpv]

The scary part about murlocs is that they can get full-poison without even going for Megasaur. Also, the new murloc legendary is dumb, why would they even put something like it in the mode? As if murlocs needed even more late game power. xD

But yeah, never underestimate things like Sky Golems + Khadgar. It's almost as good as Rats + Hyena + Pack Leader, and you can transition later on for better things (or get the Golem golden for maximum kek; it can spawn quite a bunch of threats).
And Soul Jugglers too. The bastards are good early on, even with just a few demons. Then you either sell and transition to a better strategy, or get the demon dream of Mal'Ganis and Void Lords.

[Eurus]

I swear that I do poorly if I try to run a tribal theme, and can only pull off menagerie effectively. I must just be missing something about beast and mech strategies.

[Tvtyrant]

I got second place with a conpletely tribaless strategy a few days ago, just leveled up as fast as possible and focused on legendaries. That was remarkably fun.

[Zevox]

A data scientist for Blizzard has been posting about Battlegrounds MMR and where you stand (as part of a discussion about normalizing MMR and how they nerfed the MMR gains if you're at the top of the MMR)
[...]

Basically, if you're in a lobby with people worse than you, you'll win fewer points for a win and lose more points if you lose. This supposedly won't impact people in the 3000-5000 MMR range at all, since they're matched well already.

Huh, that would certainly explain some oddness I had with my games yesterday. I had two first-place finishes and a fourth - the first-places gained me 119 and 180(!) points, and the fourth place lost me a small amount of points (I forget how much). I already knew that first first place seemed high, and the second very much confirmed it, but then the fourth place actually losing me points was a baffling surprise. I guess that means that I was in a match with people higher-ranked than me in the first couple of games and lower in the third.

As annoying as losing some points for a fourth place finish was, I have to say that I like that. A ranked system like this really should take that kind of thing into account when calculating your rank, I feel.

I think for me, my issues are being pretty inflexible with my builds. I have an idea "this card is good, this card is bad", try to draft only good cards. So I skip over things like Shredders, mechs with divine shields or even things like Bolvar in hunt for the "good cards" like Amalgam, battlecry buffers, or Cobalt Guardian.

Yeah, that can definitely be an issue. Getting tunnel vision and either focusing exclusively on a single minion type too early, when you can absolutely still transition if you get something that could make yourself stronger, or aiming only for the best cards and ignoring ones that will still work well and help keep you alive can be issues. Heck, things like Shredders aren't even bad - they're not ideal, but if you get some buffs on them anyway as you go along, it can be totally viable to take a gold one all the way to the endgame in the right composition.

A similar problem can be not knowing when to give up on a triple. Sometimes keeping that weaker minion around because you have two of it might be fine, but sometimes it might be a good way to get yourself killed early. You kind of need to develop a sense of when to sell them if the third just won't show.

Rafaam is pretty broken.

He's the one new hero I got to play yesterday, and he did seem pretty strong, yeah (he was one of the first-place finishes). Paying one gold for a minion that one of your rivals thought was good enough to put in their composition seems generally quite strong - early on you might just get a token from Tidecaller or Alley Cat, but that's the worst-case since later on tokens all come from deathrattles, and it still refunds your gold. Makes getting golden minions easier, too, it seems; I was able to get a gold Spawn of N'Zoth pretty quickly, since a lot of people pick him up in the mid-game, and he's always put into first to attacks and die immediately. Late-game he can even pick up Brann or Lightfang that way, too, which is nuts.

Another big high-roll is stealing one of AF Kay's tier 3 freebies on turn 3 or 4, when most people don't have those yet. I actually got an Imp Gang Boss this way as my first steal ever, which was pretty nice and made the early game that much easier.

I swear that I do poorly if I try to run a tribal theme, and can only pull off menagerie effectively. I must just be missing something about beast and mech strategies.

Menagerie is very good partially because it goes best with Lightfang/Brann, but also because it's always possible to transition to it from whatever you run early easier than it is to fully transition from one tribe to another. Committing to a single tribe early and trying to just stick to that can often be a problem if you just stop getting offered things for that tribe at some point, whether because of simple luck or because it's popular and everyone else is taking its minions instead. (Except demons, nobody goes for that aside from sometimes the Annihilan Battlemasters, so if you get offered Soul Jugglers [which are the only thing that can make that tribe competitive] in the mid-game, odds are you can commit to that and make it happen just fine).

Generally speaking though, I'd say that the big reasons to go all Mech or Beast are Junkbot and Mama Bear, respectively. Hyena and Pack Leader combined with Rat Pack offer incentive for a full Beast composition in the early and mid game too, but won't carry you through to the end without Mama Bear - and even with her can struggle, since Beasts don't get divine shield and barely get poisonous (only on Maexxna - and Amalgam, of course), where Mechs get a lot of divine shield and Menagerie and Murlocs can get both. And Cobalt Guardian is obviously a big Mech incentive you can pick up fairly early, but he doesn't require a full Mech composition. Just having one thing that spawns more mechs and has taunt (such as Amalgam with the Replicating Menace deathrattle, or a Security Rover with Annoy-of-Module) is enough to make a Cobalt Guardian worth it, so you can totally take them and still go Menagerie anyway, if you get offered Lightfang instead of Junbot at tier 5, or just aren't finding Screwjank Clunkers or Metaltooth Leapers to buff your mechs and need to make use of what you are getting offered.

[Rynjin]

How do people get 7 Poison Murlocs? I can understand 6, but there should be no way to get 7 that I know of, and yet I see it repeatedly.

[Zevox]

How do people get 7 Poison Murlocs? I can understand 6, but there should be no way to get 7 that I know of, and yet I see it repeatedly.

Aside from Akazamarak (or whatever his name is) getting one off a Splitting Image secret, I can't think of any. You could have six poisonous Murlocs and Maexxna to have seven total poisonous minions, but seven poisonous Murlocs specifically shouldn't be possible.

[AmberVael]

Put poison on a murloc through any method, make it golden to drop it into your hand, make all the other murlocs poison through battlecries, sell off the one non-poison, then drop the golden one on the board. 7 poison murlocs.

[Zevox]

Put poison on a murloc through any method, make it golden to drop it into your hand, make all the other murlocs poison through battlecries, sell off the one non-poison, then drop the golden one on the board. 7 poison murlocs.

Ah, true, I suppose that would be the way to pull it off. Though unless you're on what you're pretty confident will be the final battle, it's always questionable to fill up your board with things you're not happy to sell.

[Seerow]

Prerelease event is live! This may be the last preorder bundle I buy for a while unless the game hooks me back in a major way in the next few months, but these were already budgeted when I bought amazon coins at the start of the year, so we've got some packs to open.


I actually made out really well this go around. To the point where I'm debating if I want to drop my 8k gold on more packs or just double up for a ~160 pack opening with no money invested for the first expansion of next year.

Spoiler: Legendary Pulls

Show

Started with 166 packs, the number next to each indicates how many packs were remaining when I pulled the legendary. So Ancharr at 156 was my 10th pack.

156 - Ancharr
149 - Dragonbane
148 - Golden Veranus
143 - Frizz Kindleroot
114 - Deathwing, Mad Aspect
095 - Waxadred
084 - Golden Nithogg
059 - Nozdormu the Timeless
041 - Murozond the Infinite
030 - Flik Skyshiv
016 - Shu'ma
000 - Mindflayer Kaahrj


Overall 12 legendaries out of 166 packs is really pretty fantastic (averaging about 1 per 14 packs, that's a good 1-2 standard deviations ahead of the average I feel like), and 2 of those being Golden really makes up for my lack of golden legendary pulls the last couple expansions.

Stats on goldens/epics/etc will wait until official release because I may still buy my gold based packs, and also the search function doesn't really function that well with the prerelease events

[Zevox]

So, if their goal with the ranking changes in Battlegrounds was to slow down people ranking above the 5500 (or whatever) mark, I'm not sure if that worked. I've been pretty consistently getting as much rank for a second-place finish as I used to for a first-place, and my first-places have been substantially more points, sometimes almost double what they used to be. As a result, I've skyrocketed from just over rank 6k to rank 6817 the past couple of days. And that despite a couple of 8th-place finishes that cost me I believe around 200 points each. Wasn't expecting to be pushing 7k so soon after hitting 6k, but here I am.

Also, tried out Edwin a couple of times yesterday. He seemed good, but he's more of a late-game hero, I think. It's just hard to find good times to use his hero power before turn 6 (the one where you have 8 gold), unless you don't have a token to sell on turn 3, and even then it's just +1/+1, so it doesn't make a lot of difference. Once you've got 10 gold every turn you want to use it each turn for +2/+2 or +3/+3 to your minion of choice unless you really can't spare that one gold, though, it's quite strong. He might be another Nefarian or George-style one, I think, where he won't be in the top tier of heroes who are just good at all stages of the game, but he's very strong if he survives to the late game.

Still haven't had the chance to pick Sylvanas. My suspicion is she's the weakest of the new trio, but she still looks better than a lot of the weaker heroes we've had, so I'm very curious to see how she'll be.

[Seerow]

So, if their goal with the ranking changes in Battlegrounds was to slow down people ranking above the 5500 (or whatever) mark, I'm not sure if that worked. I've been pretty consistently getting as much rank for a second-place finish as I used to for a first-place, and my first-places have been substantially more points, sometimes almost double what they used to be. As a result, I've skyrocketed from just over rank 6k to rank 6817 the past couple of days. And that despite a couple of 8th-place finishes that cost me I believe around 200 points each. Wasn't expecting to be pushing 7k so soon after hitting 6k, but here I am.

Also, tried out Edwin a couple of times yesterday. He seemed good, but he's more of a late-game hero, I think. It's just hard to find good times to use his hero power before turn 6 (the one where you have 8 gold), unless you don't have a token to sell on turn 3, and even then it's just +1/+1, so it doesn't make a lot of difference. Once you've got 10 gold every turn you want to use it each turn for +2/+2 or +3/+3 to your minion of choice unless you really can't spare that one gold, though, it's quite strong. He might be another Nefarian or George-style one, I think, where he won't be in the top tier of heroes who are just good at all stages of the game, but he's very strong if he survives to the late game.

Still haven't had the chance to pick Sylvanas. My suspicion is she's the weakest of the new trio, but she still looks better than a lot of the weaker heroes we've had, so I'm very curious to see how she'll be.

As long as you're still in the 6-8k range you're probably fine. What was happening was before the change the top 1% players were continuing to cruise at the same rate you are currently up to 10k+ mmr, and creating a gap that no amount of play time could reasonably compensate for as long as they kept playing. Now, if there's only a handful of people that high, most games they play are going to be against people 1-2k mmr lower than them, and they will gain significantly less and lose significantly more on average.

Right now you're in a band where there's still lots of active players in your mmr range, so your games are primarily against people with the same mmr as you, so your climb is mostly unaffected.

[Gandariel]

Oh, crud... I'm super late on results and this expansion's prediction game. Sorry everyone, I've been busy.

The expansion launches in 2 days, soim afraid we won't have time for this one, but I'll certainly crown the champion for last time.


And by the way, finally broke 6k score in Battlegrounds. (14 wins, 50 top 4s).


Had a really fun game today:

Last turn I had upgraded to tier 4 and played Brann from a Shifter Zerus. The rest of my board consisted of Khadgar and a bunch of random deathrattle dudes.
Turn started, and I see Primalfin Lookout, Tidehunter and the +2 health Murloc guy.


I went tidehunter (free triple = king bagurgle), Primalfin (two more tidehunter), into more tide hunters, more bagurgle, I basically put a hundred stat points in play in a single turn. Super hectic, even though I did screw up a bit due to being on mobile and not having enough time

[Zevox]

So, the only pre-set prediction I have any enthusiasm to do: Galakronds.

My take, I think the Shaman Galakrond is the best and will almost surely be a deck unless none of them are, and the Priest one is sadly the worst and won't be unless all of them are. I tentatively want to call Rogue as second-best, but I do have some concerns about how you build the deck to make it work. Warrior and Warlock both look iffy to me, though I think Warrior looks more likely to be good than Warlock. So, Rogue or maybe Warrior as second-best most likely, and Warlock as fourth and definitely least likely to be a real thing besides Priest.

On the subject of Battlegrounds, after playing quite a bit today, I'm starting to feel a little frustrated with it. It feels like the addition of Bagurgle and nerf to Lightfang have resulted in Murlocs just being the dominant strategy now - they no longer have that weak period in between their early strength and the late-game ridiculousness of Megasaur divine shield + poison, because Bagurgle is a huge power boost to them, and Menagerie lost enough durability from the Lightfang hit that they're not longer overpowering them before the Murlocs can find Megasaurs. So it seems like most players try to go Murlocs now, and the winner is just whoever high-rolls into more Bagurgles and the earliest Megasaur. That's kind of a downgrade from the previous meta, where Menagerie was probably the best strategy, but Mechs felt competitive with them late and were stronger early unless you found a crazy early Lightfang, plus Beasts could compete with an early Mama Bear or a Goldrin + Rivendare combo, the potential for Murlocs going bonkers in the late-game if they got lucky existed, and even Demons I was able to score some wins with off Soul Juggler. But with Murlocs having a much easier time surviving to get to their Divine Shield + Poison combo, it feels like you either get that or lose to it, and that kind of sucks.