You must be joking dude. I'm a whale and I'm actually searching for a replacement for HS currently, because the meta is absolutely atrocious. Having all the cards doesn't mean you don't face all those crappy decks. It just means you're more likely to have a deck on an equal power level.

And the changes made to HS recently were all made entirely to benefit non-whales. So don't you worry, the whales are leaving. And so is everyone else. But don't go complaining after we've left if the game doesn't become more fun.

Good to know, thanks!

Does anyone know how legendaries work with nerfs? Thinking about dusting the legendaries hit by the nerfs, then buying this 20$ set to get them back guaranteed and disenchant again. Will it work or do they disable duplicate protection for legendaries too following nerfs?

It's great, but I guess it's too slow. Stealer of Souls is 4 Mana, Plot Twist 2. So the earliest you can do is turn 6. You're dead by then imho. But I'll try, looks fun.

So sad. If only there were a mode where we could just play and enjoy hearthstone. I played hearthstone for over an hour in standard and just kept conceding at diamond 5. Didn't find a single Nozdormu.

Then I switched to casual and found a single Noz deck in around 25 games. So disappointing. And could be easily remidied. Just give double Exp to any deck playing Nozdormu on the 15th, announce it beforehand. Boom, you're done.

Fuck me. Nothing happened so I pressed the end turn button. Which resets the puzzle. Questionable design if you ask me.

Not really. With doing all the dailies alone you should get to level 150. So 191 seems about right. 

What a load of rubbish. xD
Let's have a look at your arguments, shall we...

Quote From Nefiret

However, the so-called "positive discrimination" can be dangerous and can work against what we were trying to achieve.

Yes, positive discrimination can have unintended side effects that work against the goals "we" are trying to achieve. But clearly, if you read the Tweets by Jia above, they have an intended goal and a measurable effect so we can gauge whether the positive discrimination works or not. If you even read the comments by Slysssa and others, Hearthstone and many other gaming communities could currently be considered discriminatory against women. Described above is also, that the people who are currently speaking out have been dealing with this issue for years, hoping that over time the issue would resolve. It did not. Therefore it follows that action has to be taken changing the current view members of the community are holding to change the community as a whole to be more inclusive. Which in turn, as RegisKilbin stated will build up the entire game and community. What's your argument against that? Some vague fears and consequences that you left purposefully ambigous. 

Quote From Nefiret

The fact that gender, race or sexual orientation is considered as a factor over the merits, effort and personal worth is a serious error in my opinion.

Why? Because there is nothing more sexist than choosing someone ONLY because of their gender, or there is nothing more racist than choosing someone ONLY because of their race. That’s discrimination, “positive”, but discrimination nonetheless.

I would agree. But if you read above, people like Avelline want to be respected for their skill, want to be invited for their skill. Not for being a woman. They clearly want to be respected for the players they are, the challenges they have overcome. Not merely for fitting into the current flavor of the day minority. If you've followed the discussion, then for invitationals there's always plenty of people that elligible to take part. So if you choose 8 men over others players, despite your player base encompassing plenty of talents from all races, genders or orientation, then you are engaging in discrimination against those players. That's what this is about.

As was pointed out by Jia, the individual treshhold at which you consider representation to be enough may vary. Clearly, you are of the opinion that this representational value should be Zero and it should be all skill. But if the community attributes female players less skill - based on no reason whatsoever - then judging based on skill becomes null and void. Representation matters all the more in that case to loosen these old and unwarranted beliefs that certain groups are just "better".

Quote From Nefiret

We are all human beings, we must leave out trifles such as sex, race, sexual orientation and other personal characteristics that do not influence at all in, for example, a card game.

I would agree again. But this is not what happens, as you can clearly see when you read the testimonials above. So if you treat everyone as a human being, regardless of sex, race, sexual orientation or other personal characteristics then good for you! That is admirable and if everyone acted the same way you did, then we wouldn't have to discuss this matter at all. Fact of the matter is though, plenty of people don't think like that. They feel like they are the master race and should be the only ones who are entitled to playing or winning competitively. To an extent where they feel entitled to harass others about it. If you wanted to stop everyone from acting that way, how would YOU do it?  You wouldn't, would you? You think everything was fine as it was before, despite evidence to the contrary.

Quote From Nefiret

I fully understand that Blizzard wants us to believe that this game is for women too, but make no mistake, the vast majority of content creators and professional players of this game are men.

It's a lovely tautological argument, isn't it? The game is intended for men, so let's make it more asinine to women, so less women play it, so we can make it more suitable for men. It's a vicious cicle. Yes, even today, more men than women play video games. Sure. But women WANT to play video games. So simply saying more men are playing than women, so we should not even give them a platform is stupid. Neither does it not hold any relevance to the community being toxic towards minorities in the game. More men play the game, so we are allowed to harrass women? Yeah, that's a great position to hold. 

Quote From Nefiret

I really wish it were something more egalitarian or there was some clear way to do so, seriously, but forcing women to participate just because they are women without meeting the popularity and merit requirements that have been demanded of the other male participants... it seems to me an outrage.

I could mistake these words for wisdom, were it not for the thinly veiled misoginy I read here. You're talking about "forcing women to participate", when clearly there are plenty of female players that would delight in taking part, be it to compete with the best or to develop their brand and income. So don't even try to come off as you're merely trying to protect those poor females that the evil corporation would force to partake in their events. Go shave that neckbeard right off. 

Yes, in a perfect society, the rules as to how you are elligible to be invited to an event would be set in stone. You would have some cut-off values and everyone above gets in. But that's neither how the market nor the world works. There are always diverse interests and biases of individuals and corporations to deal with. Maybe Blizzard wants to expand in new markets and therefore will include more people from South America and Africa in order to generate interest and revenue in those continents. Could you fault them for that? Should you fault them if they think it's a good idea to have more females in tournaments because that's a market they can still expand in, while most of the males already play some kind of game and are therefore harder to expand in as a market?

Again, this has no relevance to the issue at hand. The community has toxic elements and biases against certain groups of players. How would you address this issue? 

Quote From Nefiret

I am convinced that there must be other ways to encourage and favor the participation of women and other minorities in public events of this caliber, but I honestly believe that "positive discrimination" is not the solution.

And I believe that you believe that. But you do not present any other options. Also here  you start to show your true colours. Either that or you're wording it clumsily. Because my reading of this is that you while you think they should somehow be included, you clearly seem to be of the opinion that they do not deserve the spots they currently hold. So clearly you do not think that women or minorities deserve the spots they get at all. None of the women ask for extra slots just to be included.

They precisely ask for what you pretend already happened before. To compete on even grounds. To be treated with decency and honor, their issues not neglected and brushed aside by an unrelenting community. To be heard as equal members of this community with their own views and needs that deserve being heard.

You can achieve this if you lead by example. You go and include them, even if it means a slight overrepresentation, just to spite and quiet those voices that so shamelessly cause toxic interactions. Just so you can show that you do not stand for this kind of behaviour. 

Quote From Nefiret

Imagine that for future editions it is required that half of the participants be men and the other half women, but that because men are a majority and are more specialized (which is a fact) they far exceed women and leave them in a bad place... is that positive? What should be done? Maybe rig the game so that women can have more opportunities than men and thus win more and balance the scale? I don’t think so.

Ah yes, the great finisher to drive the point ad absurdum. Make a ridiculous over the top statement, that will make drive your point home. Again your misoginy shines through. You do not think that any woman could be as good as a man. THerefore you assume that they would require some sort of assistance by the game devs or some tournament requirement to be able to compete on even grounds. And this despite you specifically stating above that we should "leave out trifles such as sex, race, sexual orientation and other personal characteristics". 

So where does your fact that "men are more specialized" come from other than some imaginary bias that you yourself hold? Where do you get the audacity to tell women they cannot be as "specialized" as the men and claiming that even if they did, they could not reach the levels of men and would need some kind of assistance? I can tell you: Ignorance, bias, prejudice. You might feel like you are inclusive, but people like yourself are exactly why the problem is so pervasive. You feel like you're fair and equal. You're not. You are giving power to the status quo, regardless of whether that is a good thing or not. You merely feeling that there is no problem or there is no good solution, does not equate that nothing should be done.  Your claims of positive discrimination are a slap in the face of people like Hafu, Pathra, Alliestrasza, Jia, Avelline and many others have earned their position in this community. Despite the amount of resistance they had to weather. Are you seriously claiming that they've been given anything more than what they deserve?

Let's look at it from another perspective. Let's assume we include two people from minorities in each event. And they always lose. They're the first to drop out at every single event. You've therefore watered down the competition slightly at the first level. Some toxic members then will take it for granted they are just worse and will claim supremacy over the minorities. That's your scenario of "positive discrimination can be dangerous" from above, isn't it?

 
Well to a member of the minority winning or losing doesn't matter. Representation matters. Having a role model to look up to, to aspire to matters. You will root for this person regardless of the chances of them winning. And that person will try all the harder to improve just to show they're worth their salt. These aspirations we should cherish as a community. We should encourage everyone to stand up and try their best. Respect them for trying. Respect them for partaking. Be willing to help them become better. And most importantly we as a community should stand up and say no to those voices in our community that actively hamper these efforts.

  
The best will persist in the grand scheme of things. Noone is suggesting to just give the Grandmaster title to just anyone of the right minority. All they're asking is more representation to level the playing field. So they can focus on playing the game rather than having to worry about getting assaulted, sexualized and ridiculed everywhere they go. And if you cannot get behind that cause, then clearly, you are part of the problem.

No, this is not the same as Hall of Fame.

Yes you get full dust back if you disenchant it. So if you want to try it for fun, then disenchant it later, sure go ahead. It does not mean you get 3200 dust for owning a golden copy though.

Can't say I was happy with my experience against the boss. The first time I had an average deck, but managed to whittle him down to 54 HP.

The second time I had a much stronger deck. But on turn 2 he drew THREE murloc generators, managed to get a [Hearthstone Card (Scargill) Not Found] through the random murloc generation. Which enabled him to get his 10/10 out. Turn 3 he had Everyfin is Awesome and missed lethal by like 8 dmg. Turn 4 I was done for. :(