Honestly, there being a patch today was not really surprising to a lot of people. If you'd like to stay in the loop in the future, come check out the snap.fan community discord.
There were a decent number of very minor changes, but nothing huge in today's patch.
To start, titles were added to the game. These are theoretically changeable on the avatar change screen, but I haven't gotten any from caches yet...
Oh yea, they come from reserves now...so before, when you opened a Collector's Reserve, you had a 12.5% chance to get a variant and a 12.5% chance to get an avatar. That has been changed to:
- Variant - 10.0%
- Avatar - 7.5%
- Title - 7.5%
So less variants and avatars and more titles! This seems awkward to me. Titles have the same issue as avatars, as far as I can tell...that is once you get 1, you don't care to get any more. On top of that, some of the titles feel like they should be earned by what you do in game...but they aren't. So the net effect in my mind, is I've had my variant chance change from 12.5% to 10.0%, and that's about it.
Past that, there were updates to make the general UI function better.
Card mechanic changes
"Jubilee no longer triggers 'on play' effects for cards like Angela, Bishop, and Lockjaw when she pulls them from the deck."
I hate this. But not for the reason you may think. I hate that this is causing a divergence in how different cards work mechanically. I wrote a whole guide (that I now need to update) on playing cards. Jubilee's functionality here was a thing that I wrote about, to bring clarity to how it works. Second Dinner did NOT create more clarity in the game, as they did not change the underlying rules on how this sort of mechanic works. They changed how precisely 1 card - Jubilee - works, and not others. What others you may ask? Arnim Zola is the first that comes to mind. I went and played/lost 2 games just to force test the mechanic, and Zola was not changed to work similarly to Jubilee. This honestly outrages me. I want rules to be consistent. Yes, Jubilee was counter-intuitive, but at least every card followed the same play ordering guidelines...and now they don't. I do not like piece-wise changes. If they want to change the rule across the board, by all means,, they should do so.
So to explain how Zola works...
Let's say we have a Mystique in play, that did not get her On-Reveal (for whatever reason - I just played her turn-3 with nothing else in play to test, but Sakaar could do it as well). Then on turn5 we play an Iron Man (or pick any Ongoing card)...and on turn6, we play Arnim Zola, killing Mystique. This still works the way it did before the patch, and the way Jubilee worked before the patch. That is, when the 2 new Mystiques spawn from Zola, they do not consider Zola to have been played, and thus they WILL copy the Ongoing from the card played previously, such as Iron Man.
[Edit: Jubilee pulling Mystique will work as she used to, and will have the same ordering and copy an Ongoing played before Jubilee.]
"Updated functionality of Wolfsbane and Dagger to counter unrevealed cards when determining their Power gains."
I don't think I like this one either. Dagger could use the buff, but I'm also a little worried that they are once again changing the core rules of specific cards, and not general card functionality. For Wolfsbane, when could this matter? If Dr. Octopus pulls cards? If we play stupidly? Perhaps abusive with not-yet-revealed cards such as [[Spoiler]]. DON'T MOUSE OVER THAT IF YOU DON'T WANT A SPOILER. I'm not gonna explain it, but I'm sure you can figure it out. For Dr. Octopus, why is Wolfsbane getting this preferential treatment and other cards aren't?
Again, the problem is that this starts to go down a slippery slope of cards being treated fundamentally different, rather than based on core rules.