New Previews and BRM Pre-Purchase Now Available

On March 20 2015 12:35 s3rp wrote:
I don't really see the point of the Imp Gang Boss. Warlock doesn't have that many effect to damage own guys and by hitting minions i don't think you'll get much use out of this. The others look decent enough that they should at least be tried out.

On March 20 2015 13:00 lost_artz wrote:
core rager is insane. Empty hand as a Hunter? EZ-PZ. Doesn't even have to be a turn 4 drop to get great value.

On March 20 2015 12:50 Circumstance wrote:
I see more upside in Core Rager than others do. It gives Hunter a 4-drop and packs serious punch. And if you need to consider running or keeping BGH against a Hunter, that's really gonna screw you.

On March 20 2015 13:10 Zato-1 wrote:

You don't keep BGH against hunter. To play an early 7/7 Core Rager, they need to play out their entire hand by turn 3, then draw Core Rager as their only card on turn 4. Not something you need to play around because of how incredibly unlikely it is.

Have a Savannah Highmane on your hand, or maybe Dr. Boom? Oops, you can't get a 7/7 Core Rager until like turn 8, at which point your great reward for holding onto this thing for like 5 turns will be a cheaper War Golem. Even a Kill Command will make it hard to get your 7/7 Rager. I don't see this card being played unless you don't have either Highmane or Dr. Boom in your deck, in which case this would be the most expensive card in your deck which means you're playing face hunter. Will it see play in Face Hunter? I don't think so; those like their minions with charge, or at least an immediate effect like Abusive Sergeant. It would be interesting to be proved wrong, but Core Rager looks like a terribly inconsistent card- that, or a consistently inferior Chillwind Yeti / Piloted Shredder.

On March 20 2015 13:30 kingjames01 wrote:


You don't have to play Core Rager on turn 4 to get extra value out of it.

Extreme Aggro Hunters lose steam when they're top-decking. If you can get a Core Rager to stick to the board, on your next turn, you can empty your hand and turn it into a 7/7 on your own turn.

On March 20 2015 12:35 s3rp wrote:
I don't really see the point of the Imp Gang Boss. Warlock doesn't have that many effect to damage own guys and by hitting minions i don't think you'll get much use out of this. The others look decent enough that they should at least be tried out.

On March 20 2015 13:36 Verator wrote:


With it being a battlecry, I take that to mean it only is triggered if it is the last card in your hand when you play it.

On March 20 2015 04:55 kingjames01 wrote:

Give us a release date!!

On March 20 2015 16:30 baev_os wrote:
It looks like in the comments above there are only huntards. Did everyone forgot about zoolock ? Core Rager is great card for him.

Imp Gang Boss text should be read as "Deathrattle: Summon 1-4 1/1 Imps".

On March 20 2015 13:00 lost_artz wrote:
core rager is insane. Empty hand as a Hunter? EZ-PZ. Doesn't even have to be a turn 4 drop to get great value.

On March 20 2015 12:21 Roe wrote:
I predict everyone (myself included) is gonna call that thing Flame walker most of the time

re: release date, I thought it was the first week of april

On March 20 2015 16:26 Acidance wrote:


Rly? Things point it will me 1st march.

On March 20 2015 23:36 kingjames01 wrote:




I think you meant April but to respond to the both of you, no one has ever said that it will be the beginning of April. All announcements have been extremely careful to say that the new Adventure would be released IN April.

My thought is that they have a release date in mind, but don't want to be bound to it if they overshoot by a day or two.

I think you meant April

On March 21 2015 02:44 IcemanAsi wrote:
Flamewaker is really cool card, you can play it aggressively as +2 spelldamage on finishers if the board is empty, but my favorite option is as a form of mid game AoE in a control type mage.

On March 21 2015 02:49 kingjames01 wrote:


Yeah, this is the way I'll probably be trying it once I have the card.

My thought is to build a deck with Mana Wyrms, Sorceror's Apprentices, Flamewakers, Mirror Images and the normal suite of Mage Spells. I'd use that to open and hold the board until I can enter the midgame safely.

On March 20 2015 16:26 Acidance wrote:


Rly? Things point it will me 1st march.

On March 21 2015 02:08 Volband wrote:
Everyone is talking about whether the new cards will be good or not, but let me chime in with saying how unimaginative and boring most of them are, both artwork and effect wise (except the big dragon and lava shock). GvG was funny, Naxx was cool, and now we already have a bunch of random dwarves. With the Naxx cards I wanted to try all of them, because they just looked so freakin' cool, even if it was obvious that some of them are fun cards at best.

I'll probably still pre-order it, because I'm putting all my gold into packs, but man.... my fingers are so crossed for the pally cards!

On March 21 2015 04:03 NewSunshine wrote:

I disagree, I think the cards so far show some potential, they're just not as flashy as the cards we've been seeing. A card doesn't have to do something new, innovative and radical to be a great new card, it just has to be solid enough to be played, and fill a role that no card currently does, and so far all the new class cards look to do just that.

Finally anybody who got to play vanilla wow and 40 man raided has a special place on their heart for brm especially if there is bwl! !!!

On March 21 2015 16:45 Douillos wrote:


I like to add that the brm cards are a lot more innovative than the naxx cards . Naxx was primarily deathrattle synergy (and demon also , kinda,) the concept of synergy already existing (beast hunter in particular ).
Now, blizzard are introducing cards that depend on what's in your hand & how much , which apart from divine favor, mountain giant/clockwaork & twilight drake, cards that only take numbers in account, is completely new.
Concerning gvg , apart from new synergy and a fuck ton of rng (shredders / unstable portal )

Tldr this is going to be the most innovative expansion yet.

Finally anybody who got to play vanilla wow and 40 man raided has a special place on their heart for brm especially if there is bwl! !!!

On March 21 2015 02:08 Volband wrote:
Everyone is talking about whether the new cards will be good or not, but let me chime in with saying how unimaginative and boring most of them are, both artwork and effect wise (except the big dragon and lava shock). GvG was funny, Naxx was cool, and now we already have a bunch of random dwarves. With the Naxx cards I wanted to try all of them, because they just looked so freakin' cool, even if it was obvious that some of them are fun cards at best.

I'll probably still pre-order it, because I'm putting all my gold into packs, but man.... my fingers are so crossed for the pally cards!

On March 22 2015 01:33 Zorgaz wrote:
I'm liking the new cards, don't see how you can say they are worse then nax? The only things I'm not psyched about is spending more money on the game..

On March 22 2015 06:53 The_Masked_Shrimp wrote:
UH ? there are enough quests in a week to make enough gold to buy each wing as it opens each week.
You don't need to save more than 700 gold for the expac.

On March 22 2015 07:34 The_Masked_Shrimp wrote:
And why people just starting out should have everything right away?

It's a good thing that you have to follow a certain progression; like in wow you don't start max level, in most games you have to play a while to unlock things (cars/map in race games; fighters/arenas in fight games etc. Oo)

Game should not be designed so that everyone that plays 20 min every 3 days can get easy access to everything

On March 22 2015 07:34 The_Masked_Shrimp wrote:
And why people just starting out should have everything right away?

It's a good thing that you have to follow a certain progression; like in wow you don't start max level, in most games you have to play a while to unlock things (cars/map in race games; fighters/arenas in fight games etc. Oo)

Game should not be designed so that everyone that plays 20 min every 3 days can get easy access to everything

On March 22 2015 06:53 The_Masked_Shrimp wrote:
UH ? there are enough quests in a week to make enough gold to buy each wing as it opens each week.
You don't need to save more than 700 gold for the expac.

On March 22 2015 07:07 kingjames01 wrote:


If you start saving the week before the wing opens, you'd need 100 gold per day on average.

It's much more common to get a 40 gold quest than a 60 or 100. Now, in the course of completing your Daily Quest, you might earn 10 Gold or so, so you still might need 50 gold or so.

Not everyone has the time to win 15 games a day on top of completing their Daily Quests, especially if you're just starting out and your card collection isn't varied enough to have a lot of good options.

On March 22 2015 07:57 kingjames01 wrote:


What? Who said that people should have everything? This whole discussion is premised on the idea that a player doesn't have something and is looking to earn it.

Your post here:



implies that it's easy to earn "enough gold to buy each wing as it opens each week."

It seems as though you don't even know what you're trying to say.




Anyway, back on topic:



That's worst-case scenario. Let's look at some more numbers which are closer to the average:

There is:

100 Gold - 7 Wins (1x)
60 Gold - 5 Wins (9x)
40 Gold - 2 Wins (9x)
40 Gold - 3 Wins (1x)
40 Gold - 0 Wins (5x)

So assuming that you do not re-roll your Daily Quests, the expectation value for gold earned from a Daily Quest is just under 50 Gold and the expectation value for the number of wins required to earn that gold is 3 wins.

You'd get 50 Gold from the quest, and 10 more for the 3 wins. You'd still need 40 more gold to get the 100 gold per day that I mentioned above. That's 12 more wins.

So to get have enough gold to unlock a wing the day that it's purchased, you'd have to win 15 games a day.

How many games you actually PLAY, depends on your win rate. Even assuming a decent 60%, you're looking at playing 25 games a day.

On March 22 2015 09:38 Drazerk wrote:
Well if you gold farm rank 20 then you're probably playing less than 25 games so it kind of works out in your favour and if you're farming gold anywhere else than rank 20 then you're doing it wrong anyhow

On March 22 2015 07:48 Drazerk wrote:

Using your WoW example which used to be a real grind fest

On March 22 2015 09:56 kingjames01 wrote:


Right, I remember when you used to discuss the Rank 20 gold farming. What's a reasonable win rate doing it at Rank 20?

On March 22 2015 10:01 idkfa wrote:
Apropos of nothing:


Haha, Everquest has been well and truly forgotten!

On March 22 2015 10:08 Drazerk wrote:


Like 80-90% if you use a top tier control deck slightly lower if you use an aggro deck

On March 22 2015 11:09 kingjames01 wrote:


Wow, that's so good! I didn't think it would be so high. I'm really impressed!

On March 22 2015 13:15 The_Masked_Shrimp wrote:
if you do your quests while playing arena you'll make enough gold for a wing in like 3-4 arena runs ...
And seems like you really just conveniently and overly counterargument my wow example when it was just one of the games I used to make a comparison.

On March 22 2015 21:25 Zorgaz wrote:
Am I missing out on something here? How can you rank 20 farm with a 80-90% winrate? You just end up gaining ranks until you hit stronger opponents?

On March 22 2015 13:15 The_Masked_Shrimp wrote:
if you do your quests while playing arena you'll make enough gold for a wing in like 3-4 arena runs ... Not knowing what i'm trying to say ? lol
Do you just "farm gold" in casual or ranked?
If one is not good enough to earn gold through arena there is no point complaining. The gold price of wings is really low and affordable even if you play two days a week, if you are not bad that is.
And seems like you really just conveniently and overly counterargument my wow example when it was just one of the games I used to make a comparison.

On March 22 2015 22:51 Zorgaz wrote:
Well i see what you guys are saying but i certainly wouldn't enjoy playing that many games of hearthstone everyday. And auto-condeding just to stay at rank 20 seems like a waste of time. I'd rather spend a little money and do something else with my time. I tried farming Arena and have had decent success, but even though i average perhaps 7 wins that only gives me back what i spent so I think I'm just gonna end up buying it with money.

Honestly I think Hearthstone should have more daily quests or 10 gold every win in ranked or something but I understand Blizzard wants that profit.

On March 22 2015 22:42 kingjames01 wrote:


I honestly STILL do not know what you are trying to say. No one is complaining.

On March 24 2015 02:50 Origence wrote:
I tracked the card back of my last 23 games and 15 of my opponents had the new card back from BRM pre-ordering.
Other people are finding similar statistics?

I'm really blown out about how many people did pre-order the BRM adventure with real money.

On March 24 2015 02:50 Origence wrote:
I tracked the card back of my last 23 games and 15 of my opponents had the new card back from BRM pre-ordering.
Other people are finding similar statistics?

I'm really blown out about how many people did pre-order the BRM adventure with real money.

On March 23 2015 14:10 Doc Daneeka wrote:
It's Blizzard's problem if it deteriorates the casual player base that gives them most of their money, and it's our problem if they stop supporting the game due to a lack of profit. Let's say I tell myself "Okay, they fooled me once, but I'm sick of flushing money down the toilet so buh-bye Hearthstone." The deluge of new content we've been getting will have just been a fluke if loads of people walk away from the game because it's too expensive to unlock the game's content.

...

On March 24 2015 05:15 BeMannerDuPenner wrote:
honestly unless youre happy with never having a full collection and for ages playing very limited (and mostly boring) decks then you HAVE to spend money.

i bought naxx, bought a good junk of packs (think 35 in gvg alone) did quite alot of arena (100ish runs) and rarely missed a daily(ofc rerolled for amx gold). i started like 5-6 months ago and still miss 70% of important epics, almost all decent legendarys with sylvanas and geddon only useable ones i opened.

if someone starts now f2p hey would need to spend like 3 months playing with the basic cards just toi get naxx&brm which is damn boring. after that the next thing will be announced and he still has no rares,epics or legs from classic or gvg. this isnt fun. this is less then most f2p games offer in content by far.


honestly the pricing, and inability to gain gold at your on pace is among the worst i know for f2p. asian grinders 8 years ago offered more. yeah yeah compared to other tcg its not that bad but do we want to compare blizzards hearthstone really with them or other games? and in other cardgames you usually can atleast sell your shit if you decide to quit...


well ill buy brm cause i wont play evry day for hours without doing arena or opening packs for a month. ill rather just throw 20€ at it . but outside of expansions and adventures i now refuse to spend money on hearthstone.
the value for your money is just terrible (500 dust for 18€,thx rng!). And i accepted that ill never have a full collection or play flashy special decks. i just build cheap face decks for ladder and dick around with fun decks for quests.


they just need to overhaul crafting or atleast make crafting old content way cheaper plus give more options and different ways for gold.
that people mostly get gold by farming with face decks at rank 20 alone is proof that the system is stupid and bad for the game.

On March 24 2015 05:15 BeMannerDuPenner wrote:
honestly unless youre happy with never having a full collection and for ages playing very limited (and mostly boring) decks then you HAVE to spend money.

On March 26 2015 13:06 darkcoug wrote:
This game is free to play, its just not free to compete in legend. A free to play player will win about as much as a pay to play legendary player after the first day. The suckers are the ones who ponied up the $200 to shortcut the reward process and get to legend as fast as possible where they will win just as much as the guy with mostly starter cards in rank 19.

On March 26 2015 23:38 Zato-1 wrote:

That's the idea, but not how it works in practice. A friend of mine started playing recently, and about half the time he faced the very same decks I play against in ranks 3 through legend. There's a LOT of players out there with decks that belong in high ranks, but auto-concede half of their games in order to stay at rank 20 and crush newbies to farm gold; it makes it painfully evident how much stronger their decks are than yours, and how you can either farm gold for months to try to catch up, or pay up, or just continue getting crushed. My friend chose to quit Hearthstone instead, and I can't blame him. The game is pretty hostile to new players.

On March 26 2015 23:58 Hearken wrote:

Personally though, I don't care about new players, and I'm really hoping Blizzard don't either. Their focus should be on the dedicated play base.

On March 26 2015 23:58 Hearken wrote:
Personally though, I don't care about new players, and I'm really hoping Blizzard don't either. Their focus should be on the dedicated play base.

On January 14, 2015 Ben Brode wrote:
One thing we're aware of is new players could find the game harder to get into, and harder to learn, the more cards we add. We have ideas to solve those problems, but I think we're a little bit far off from those problems today.

User Question
Getting any of my friends who would be new players to play this game is near impossible at this point with how expensive Hearthstone is for new players to compete. They all go through the same process: begin playing the game through the tutorials, try each class, play the arena a few times, do a few days worth of quests, open a couple packs, and then realize that doing play mode they get absolutely crushed by seas of legendaries they don’t have, then quit. The more cards that are introduced into the game with the steep cost of the game makes the game more and more difficult for new players to get into. Are there going to be any significant ways for new players to catch up? Is there any possibility of a static cost for the game like buying all of the classic cards and naxx cards for $50?

On December 15, 2014 Ben Brode's answer to the above question:
Howdy! I super appreciate that you guys are looking out for new players. It’s really important to us that Hearthstone is approachable and accessible. We’re on the same page here.

We do have some problems with Matchmaking. We had taken steps to make sure brand new players were not matched against players who had already built massive collections, but we recently found some issues there and have been working to make it better.

We are going to continue to monitor the new player experience, and I do think we’ll need to do things to make it better over time, especially as we continue to release new content.

User Question
There needs to be a game mode where you are matched against a deck with a similar dust value. The matchmaking at the moment is just non existent.

On December 15, 2014 Yong Woo's answer to the above question:
We are always thinking ways to improve the match making system. But we don’t think that power level of a deck is directly proportional its dust value.