If I squint it's Tomb Pillager, which is awesome; 4 5/4 has proven to be a playable statline, Hunter's are strong right now though more the Midrange variety, but won't matter cause 4 5/4 can be curve filler, unlike the 5 mana 4/6.
The beast variant wouldn't run this because it interferes with Master's call.
It's a fine card but I doubt it'll see much play in standard until secrets become relevant again.
Kel'Thuzad was never very good. Revenge of the Wild hasn't found a way to be very good. I think we might be at the point where we can reasonably say that these effects aren't very good.
It's not horrible in the current iteration of beast hunter b/c you have so many rush&charge beasts, which make it easier to set up and allow you to double-dip on attacks. I'd say it juuuust barely misses the cut for the standard ladder version of the deck.
You're making my point for me. Revenge of the Wild is a MUCH better card than this and it still isn't played. More often than not, this type of effect only encourages bad trades.
I'm not arguing that Whitemane is good, I doubt she'll see play unless she receives a ton of support. Just pointing out that Revenge of the Wild is better than you gave it credit for (thanks to all the good hunter cards that synergise with it). Cards that demand trading to pay off (notably cult master) have tended to be pretty bad because they're unreliable and they encourage you to do something you don't want to do with a board full of minions that can attack.
However, I think a lot of newer cards like Springpaw and Thunderhead, heck the rush mechanic itself, might make it worthwhile to revisit these trade-encouragers. I mean Scavenging hyena had been sitting on the sidelines for quite a bit too.
^ The card costs 12 though, that means you're pretty much stuck with a giant-type minion.
I suppose they could make a minion a la Shirvallah or rabble bouncer that has a cost reduction effect but isn't a giant, but it'd be pretty obvious to anyone and their uncle why they're making a 12 cost understatted dude.
I'm honestly surprised MG hasn't been hall of famed yet considering it's been a staple card for hand/cubelock for at least two years prior to conjurer mage even existing. I' d be annoyed to see it happen, but I've been expecting it for a while now.
Not only is Priest at the crap end of the spectrum right now (Thief decks for Priest don't work when you have synergy-fueled trash aggro decks like demons, murlocs and treants), Mind Blast wasn't on the meta radar, even with the legendary copying a spell cast. If this was a year ago when you could fish out Velen and Malygos for a finish, yeah, it would be met with "the community has been requesting this."
Decks that rely on Inner Fire to win are lazy to me. It's even lazier when Team 5 doesn't give priest another win condition and removes a good one (when it is supported).
Even Vanish nerf puzzles me and I don't play Rogue. It's like someone at Team 5/Blizzard opened Hearthstone complaint mail from a year ago and applied it.
While I largely agree, what I think your post overlooks is how much of a potential constraint cards like Mind Blast can have on other cards. If Blizzard were to push the shadow priest archetype then MBs would certainly be in the deck and would require the rest of the burn package to be pre-emptively toned down. Of course that argument flies in the face of this new class identity nonsense, but I doubt they'll be consistent on it anyway.
With the removal of MB I wouldn't be surprised if they give priest more burn in upcoming sets and pretend that doesn't contradict their phoney narrative about class identity.
Regarding Vanish, it wasn't a maindeck card in anything but Pogorogue, but this change sort of falls in line with the general trend of nerfing the shit out of (pseudo)-silence effects in standard (Ironbeak Owl, Hex). Seems like a pre-emptive change more than a response to the card being a problem right now.
It feels like a whole lot of rhetoric spun just to justify the removal of yet another two cards from the evergreen collection after-the-fact. I'm so tired of Blizzard twisting every which way to avoid doing the inevitable and rotating out classic. Even the new cards leave me with a bad taste in my mouth knowing why they're being introduced and what could have been instead. Not to mention them mostly being bland or unplayable.
Kel'Thuzad was never very good. Revenge of the Wild hasn't found a way to be very good. I think we might be at the point where we can reasonably say that these effects aren't very good.
It's not horrible in the current iteration of beast hunter b/c you have so many rush&charge beasts, which make it easier to set up and allow you to double-dip on attacks. I'd say it juuuust barely misses the cut for the standard ladder version of the deck.
I expect most of these to be pretty underwhelming, even in Arena. Of the lot I'd say the SI:7 is the best card, just a solid 5/4 for 4 with potential upside, runner up is the Siegebreaker. Th other minions are understatted and/or situational. Sure, if you see a Whitemane it's probably going to be the best pick in the bucket but it's no Lich King; if you want good value from it you need a board that you can trade into enemy minions. That brings me to Righteousness and Gift of the Wild, both of which are win-more cards. I expect them to have a low win rate and a disproportionately high played win rate, because if you do manage to land either one that's game over.
This is the only newly revealed card that has me a little bit excited. It's not terribly strong in standard but maybe with a few more cards demon-zoo will be a thing again. They were clearly already giving it a nudge in RoS.
If token druids are playing this that means they're in trouble anyways. This is a terrible buff card compared to the ones already in the meta because it can't be combined with other spells/minions. Unless you have a board left over from your previous turn AND 8 or more mana, this card doesn't do anything, whereas the cheaper buffs can at least be played alongside token generators.
If you do have a board then other buffs give more stats and damage per mana, especially when played together.
In terms of the actual content I'd say League of Explorers is easily the most fun of the lot. Kharazan is a bit too easy and Naxx and Blackrock especially have a few bosses that are so difficult you basically need a specific sequence of events to win, so you're just restarting over and over until your Majordomo Executus gets Mindgames-ed. Big whoop.
WRT cards, other than LoE there are only a handful that see play (Emperor T, Barnes) so you might as well craft them specifically if you're just doing it for the cards.
There's some highroll potential in this one, not sure if I like that.
I mean, if you want to pay 7 mana to take a very slim chance to high roll a King Krush or something, I think I'm probably okay with that. Seems fair enough. But it's a good point.
I'd rather have a solid reliable card than a terribly statted one that has a 1/50 of winning the game or w/e. Trying to balance around absurd highrolls is generally bad design, IMO.
Dusting non-duplicates is generally not worth it in the long run, especially with legendaries where you're just opening yourself up to getting that same unwanted legend back. But if you're going to dust something, it's usually not hard to tell what is a "crap epic", EG a card that's shitty, but too complex to have as a common or rare card. Gurubashi Offering-tier, if you will.
We really hadn't mechs since GvG, so it's ok to have a peak right now.
I'm really hoping/rooting for a Naga expansion - maybe we get something in that direction because there is the Nazjatar patch in WoW.
I am not that opposed to mechs, i just think, not every class should (be able to) utilize every tribe.
I don't see how they could have avoided it with Mechs and Boomsday, considering how central they were to the expansion. I think they did a fine job pushing mechs more heavily in certain classes compared to others like druid or shaman, where they'd feel out of place. I don't mind Mulchmuncher beign a druid mech because IMO it makes sense thematically within the setting of the expansion.
I suppose mechs in hunter are a bit odd, but what else were they going to do with the class? Push mechanical traps as the class identity?
Better internet and a faster processor certainly help. When I play on wifi there's a clear lag between me starting an action and the game registering it and lighting up green for the next action.
That said, apparently some guy calculated that even under optimal circumstances you will juuuuust barely get off a 30 damage snip-snap due to the animation time of magnetize.
^It's 5 mana summon two random Animal Companions, actually.
To answer OP's question, 2 mana: add an animal companion to your hand would be an atrocious card, strictly worse than regular animal companion. Yes, you get to see what's in the box before you play your comp, and yes that sometimes might allow you to *not* play it on 3 if the situation doesn't align with your beasty buddy, but is that really worth two mana and a full turn of development? Hell no.
HS is fundamentally a tempo game; it's about generating the most stats on board for the least amount of mana. Paying 5 mana for 3.5 mana worth of stats is a raw deal, even when you throw in the option to split the mana cost over two turns.
The beast variant wouldn't run this because it interferes with Master's call.
It's a fine card but I doubt it'll see much play in standard until secrets become relevant again.
I'm not arguing that Whitemane is good, I doubt she'll see play unless she receives a ton of support. Just pointing out that Revenge of the Wild is better than you gave it credit for (thanks to all the good hunter cards that synergise with it). Cards that demand trading to pay off (notably cult master) have tended to be pretty bad because they're unreliable and they encourage you to do something you don't want to do with a board full of minions that can attack.
However, I think a lot of newer cards like Springpaw and Thunderhead, heck the rush mechanic itself, might make it worthwhile to revisit these trade-encouragers. I mean Scavenging hyena had been sitting on the sidelines for quite a bit too.
A cheap druid spell, 3 or less mana.
^ The card costs 12 though, that means you're pretty much stuck with a giant-type minion.
I suppose they could make a minion a la Shirvallah or rabble bouncer that has a cost reduction effect but isn't a giant, but it'd be pretty obvious to anyone and their uncle why they're making a 12 cost understatted dude.
I'm honestly surprised MG hasn't been hall of famed yet considering it's been a staple card for hand/cubelock for at least two years prior to conjurer mage even existing. I' d be annoyed to see it happen, but I've been expecting it for a while now.
While I largely agree, what I think your post overlooks is how much of a potential constraint cards like Mind Blast can have on other cards. If Blizzard were to push the shadow priest archetype then MBs would certainly be in the deck and would require the rest of the burn package to be pre-emptively toned down. Of course that argument flies in the face of this new class identity nonsense, but I doubt they'll be consistent on it anyway.
With the removal of MB I wouldn't be surprised if they give priest more burn in upcoming sets and pretend that doesn't contradict their phoney narrative about class identity.
Regarding Vanish, it wasn't a maindeck card in anything but Pogorogue, but this change sort of falls in line with the general trend of nerfing the shit out of (pseudo)-silence effects in standard (Ironbeak Owl, Hex). Seems like a pre-emptive change more than a response to the card being a problem right now.
It feels like a whole lot of rhetoric spun just to justify the removal of yet another two cards from the evergreen collection after-the-fact. I'm so tired of Blizzard twisting every which way to avoid doing the inevitable and rotating out classic. Even the new cards leave me with a bad taste in my mouth knowing why they're being introduced and what could have been instead. Not to mention them mostly being bland or unplayable.
It's not horrible in the current iteration of beast hunter b/c you have so many rush&charge beasts, which make it easier to set up and allow you to double-dip on attacks. I'd say it juuuust barely misses the cut for the standard ladder version of the deck.
I expect most of these to be pretty underwhelming, even in Arena. Of the lot I'd say the SI:7 is the best card, just a solid 5/4 for 4 with potential upside, runner up is the Siegebreaker. Th other minions are understatted and/or situational. Sure, if you see a Whitemane it's probably going to be the best pick in the bucket but it's no Lich King; if you want good value from it you need a board that you can trade into enemy minions. That brings me to Righteousness and Gift of the Wild, both of which are win-more cards. I expect them to have a low win rate and a disproportionately high played win rate, because if you do manage to land either one that's game over.
This is the only newly revealed card that has me a little bit excited. It's not terribly strong in standard but maybe with a few more cards demon-zoo will be a thing again. They were clearly already giving it a nudge in RoS.
If token druids are playing this that means they're in trouble anyways. This is a terrible buff card compared to the ones already in the meta because it can't be combined with other spells/minions. Unless you have a board left over from your previous turn AND 8 or more mana, this card doesn't do anything, whereas the cheaper buffs can at least be played alongside token generators.
If you do have a board then other buffs give more stats and damage per mana, especially when played together.
Yucky win more card. Bleh/10
In terms of the actual content I'd say League of Explorers is easily the most fun of the lot. Kharazan is a bit too easy and Naxx and Blackrock especially have a few bosses that are so difficult you basically need a specific sequence of events to win, so you're just restarting over and over until your Majordomo Executus gets Mindgames-ed. Big whoop.
WRT cards, other than LoE there are only a handful that see play (Emperor T, Barnes) so you might as well craft them specifically if you're just doing it for the cards.
Miracle shaman crushes conjurer mages something fierce.
I'd rather have a solid reliable card than a terribly statted one that has a 1/50 of winning the game or w/e. Trying to balance around absurd highrolls is generally bad design, IMO.
Dusting non-duplicates is generally not worth it in the long run, especially with legendaries where you're just opening yourself up to getting that same unwanted legend back. But if you're going to dust something, it's usually not hard to tell what is a "crap epic", EG a card that's shitty, but too complex to have as a common or rare card. Gurubashi Offering-tier, if you will.
If you buff Gibberer in the tavern I'm pretty sure it creates swole copies as well. I could have sworn I had it with the +2/+2 buff one time.
I don't think this was the strongest deck I've had but definitely one of the nuttiest with the right draw.
I don't see how they could have avoided it with Mechs and Boomsday, considering how central they were to the expansion. I think they did a fine job pushing mechs more heavily in certain classes compared to others like druid or shaman, where they'd feel out of place. I don't mind Mulchmuncher beign a druid mech because IMO it makes sense thematically within the setting of the expansion.
I suppose mechs in hunter are a bit odd, but what else were they going to do with the class? Push mechanical traps as the class identity?
Better internet and a faster processor certainly help. When I play on wifi there's a clear lag between me starting an action and the game registering it and lighting up green for the next action.
That said, apparently some guy calculated that even under optimal circumstances you will juuuuust barely get off a 30 damage snip-snap due to the animation time of magnetize.
^It's 5 mana summon two random Animal Companions, actually.
To answer OP's question, 2 mana: add an animal companion to your hand would be an atrocious card, strictly worse than regular animal companion. Yes, you get to see what's in the box before you play your comp, and yes that sometimes might allow you to *not* play it on 3 if the situation doesn't align with your beasty buddy, but is that really worth two mana and a full turn of development? Hell no.
HS is fundamentally a tempo game; it's about generating the most stats on board for the least amount of mana. Paying 5 mana for 3.5 mana worth of stats is a raw deal, even when you throw in the option to split the mana cost over two turns.
They both read "after a minion is played", so it'd make sense for it to work this way if you played the potion first.
That said it's always bugged me that Potion of Poly reads "after" since it means that you can't use it to stop battlecries.