Talk:Expansion

Plans
Hi, I think this line should be changed: "However, with Standard format in mind, the developers now plan to have a new expansion at both the start and end of each year, with an adventure somewhere in between." I think the word "plan" is too strong an interpretation of the source material cited:

"What interests Trump, however, are the suggested plans for 2016 and 2017. Rather than continuing a cadence of expansion-adventure-expansion-adventure, Blizzard lays out a timeline with two expansions per year — one at the start, one near the end — and a single adventure between them. If this new formula were to stay consistent, the much bigger expansions would greatly outnumber the smaller and more single-player-focused adventure sets.

"'It's not what we've done so far, but maybe that's the right thing for the future,' Donais says. 'We haven't decided whether adventures should be as common as expansions or not. Maybe the rate of 1-to-1 is not right.'"

The source article shows they are/were thinking about changing the pattern, not that they have decided to do so.

Thank you!

99.186.53.135 17:23, 4 January 2017 (UTC)CheezCurls


 * Well, whatever their plans were, they appears to have changed them now ;) I've updated the page to match what we know at present. -- Taohinton (talk) 23:22, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

Expansion Release Calendar
I replaced the abbreviations in the "Expansion Release Calendar" with the full Expansion/Adventure names. I apologize if the abbreviations were anyone's carefully made decision. I personally had to put a lot of effort into reading the old version, which pretty much ruins the point of having a nice convenient table summary. I actually started editing it just to look at the expanded version myself for a moment, then figured it was probably worth saving. --Mqduck40956 (talk) 03:19, 10 February 2019 (UTC)


 * Some time ago, I actually maintained a copy of the table in Card set to be in this article but with the Adventures removed. I deleted that a while back, since I thought it was simpler to just maintain the table on the page Card set. Apparently, people still equate "expansions" to "card sets", which is kind of wrong since expansions aren't inclusive of adventure sets, but I'm fine with the creation of a table again if that's what people want. But strictly speaking, sets like "Curse of Naxxramas" isn't really an expansion, it's an adventure.


 * TLDR, this new table seems fine with me. Aegonostic (talk) 21:09, 10 February 2019 (UTC)


 * I reverted to using abbreviations. I discovered that the table gets covered up by the ad on the right on smaller resolutions. However, I made them links to the expansion/adventure so you can see what they are when you hover the cursor over them. --Mqduck40956 (talk) 22:11, 10 February 2019 (UTC)