Hearthpwn

Its pay for freedom to play any deck and any card you want. But that does not bring you more victories, or at least not that much. Just more fun.

Just quoting a guy i found on the bnet forum.

I personally use this definition: "If a game has a PvP element of any sort, and if you can use real money to buy any kind of advantage, then the game is P2W".

DOTA2 for example is not P2W, as nothing you buy has any actual impact on the gameplay. 

HS is P2W, because people who pay money can get good cards more easily and thus have an advantage. For example, I have the priest DK but no Raza, I have the evo Shaman but no Doppelgangster, I have no other DKs nor a LK. All those are disadvantages, that result in worse decks. If I would pay money, I could acquire all these cards one way or another instantly right now, improve my decks and thus my chances of winning.

So for me i think its p2w. Just met a guy in rank 19 with 7 legendaries completly destroyed my jade golem that took me 2 weeks to make with dust and opening packs.

Not really pay2win but 100% luck2win, u can beat any expensive deck with cheap decks like any hunter deck or tempo mage all u need is some luck to draw the cards that you need every turn, whichever player gets more lucky each turn drawing the card they need wins, whoever says this game has shred of skill involved need to punch them self in the face hard as they can and think again if there is skill involved in this game.

Paying gives you an advantage.  I pay, and I have a great collection of cards.  Am I a badass legend player? No. But I feel like I win a decent amount and have fun because I have a full collection of 18 decks that I enjoy playing (13 standard and 5 wild).  They are not all teir 1, or even teir 2, some are meme decks like thief priest, but the fact that I’ve paid for cards means I have a ton of variety and thus am more likely to not burn it in one or two decks.  I get to rank 10 regularly, occasionally rank 5, but I’m super content with that.

If expansions weren't so frequent and gold weren't so scarse, I'd say it is not P2W. But given that you can never get everything with gold (except arena) it is very much P2W. Doesn't mean it is not possible to get great results without paying of course.

Playing well in the arena can give a lot of gold and cards even for F2P players. However, if that is what you spend your time doing, then you don't need the cards in the first place, so I'd say Arena can be F2P. Constructed can not.

Not pay to win but .... 

Grind to win or luck to win. 

Quote from FakeNorwegian >>

Just quoting a guy i found on the bnet forum.

 

I personally use this definition: "If a game has a PvP element of any sort, and if you can use real money to buy any kind of advantage, then the game is P2W".

DOTA2 for example is not P2W, as nothing you buy has any actual impact on the gameplay. 

HS is P2W, because people who pay money can get good cards more easily and thus have an advantage. For example, I have the priest DK but no Raza, I have the evo Shaman but no Doppelgangster, I have no other DKs nor a LK. All those are disadvantages, that result in worse decks. If I would pay money, I could acquire all these cards one way or another instantly right now, improve my decks and thus my chances of winning.

 

So for me i think its p2w. Just met a guy in rank 19 with 7 legendaries completly destroyed my jade golem that took me 2 weeks to make with dust and opening packs.

Quote from FakeNorwegian >>

Just quoting a guy i found on the bnet forum.

 

I personally use this definition: "If a game has a PvP element of any sort, and if you can use real money to buy any kind of advantage, then the game is P2W".

DOTA2 for example is not P2W, as nothing you buy has any actual impact on the gameplay. 

HS is P2W, because people who pay money can get good cards more easily and thus have an advantage. For example, I have the priest DK but no Raza, I have the evo Shaman but no Doppelgangster, I have no other DKs nor a LK. All those are disadvantages, that result in worse decks. If I would pay money, I could acquire all these cards one way or another instantly right now, improve my decks and thus my chances of winning.

 

So for me i think its p2w. Just met a guy in rank 19 with 7 legendaries completly destroyed my jade golem that took me 2 weeks to make with dust and opening packs.

Nope it's pay to advance. Big difference! :)

You can get high legend with f2p decks. Having fun is a whole different issue. Would you really have fun grinding with face hunter which is a bit less complicated than solitaire?  Success is free but for entertainment, you have to pay. Or grind arena as I do but it requires a lot of experience. Not for the newbies. And again newbies need the cards so it's ultimately paytohavefun.

Quote from maroon5five >>

Quote from FakeNorwegian >>

Just quoting a guy i found on the bnet forum.

 

I personally use this definition: "If a game has a PvP element of any sort, and if you can use real money to buy any kind of advantage, then the game is P2W".

DOTA2 for example is not P2W, as nothing you buy has any actual impact on the gameplay. 

HS is P2W, because people who pay money can get good cards more easily and thus have an advantage. For example, I have the priest DK but no Raza, I have the evo Shaman but no Doppelgangster, I have no other DKs nor a LK. All those are disadvantages, that result in worse decks. If I would pay money, I could acquire all these cards one way or another instantly right now, improve my decks and thus my chances of winning.

 

So for me i think its p2w. Just met a guy in rank 19 with 7 legendaries completly destroyed my jade golem that took me 2 weeks to make with dust and opening packs.

 Using the definition that you yourself posted, Hearthstone would not be considered a P2W game. Money does not buy you any advantage in Hearthstone that someone who did not spend money cannot get. Your example doesn't show you at a disadvantage to people who paid because people who did not pay can also gain those same "advantages" that you listed. I think you are misinterpreting the definition you are quoting.

Quote from Gunnolf >>

Nope it's pay to advance. Big difference! :)

Quote from Velrun >>

Quote from FakeNorwegian >>

Just quoting a guy i found on the bnet forum.

 

I personally use this definition: "If a game has a PvP element of any sort, and if you can use real money to buy any kind of advantage, then the game is P2W".

DOTA2 for example is not P2W, as nothing you buy has any actual impact on the gameplay. 

HS is P2W, because people who pay money can get good cards more easily and thus have an advantage. For example, I have the priest DK but no Raza, I have the evo Shaman but no Doppelgangster, I have no other DKs nor a LK. All those are disadvantages, that result in worse decks. If I would pay money, I could acquire all these cards one way or another instantly right now, improve my decks and thus my chances of winning.

 

So for me i think its p2w. Just met a guy in rank 19 with 7 legendaries completly destroyed my jade golem that took me 2 weeks to make with dust and opening packs.

 You misunderstood what he said.

You cannot pay to gain any kind of advantage in Hearthstone that you cannot also get by grinding. If you want all the cards, play more.

It has been proven time and time again that HS is not P2W. A really strong player can take a brand new account and only play without paying anything and take it to Legend in 2 months.

Quote from 3nnui >>

Quote from Velrun >>

Quote from FakeNorwegian >>

Just quoting a guy i found on the bnet forum.

 

I personally use this definition: "If a game has a PvP element of any sort, and if you can use real money to buy any kind of advantage, then the game is P2W".

DOTA2 for example is not P2W, as nothing you buy has any actual impact on the gameplay. 

HS is P2W, because people who pay money can get good cards more easily and thus have an advantage. For example, I have the priest DK but no Raza, I have the evo Shaman but no Doppelgangster, I have no other DKs nor a LK. All those are disadvantages, that result in worse decks. If I would pay money, I could acquire all these cards one way or another instantly right now, improve my decks and thus my chances of winning.

 

So for me i think its p2w. Just met a guy in rank 19 with 7 legendaries completly destroyed my jade golem that took me 2 weeks to make with dust and opening packs.

 You misunderstood what he said.

You cannot pay to gain any kind of advantage in Hearthstone that you cannot also get by grinding. If you want all the cards, play more.

It has been proven time and time again that HS is not P2W. A really strong player can take a brand new account and only play without paying anything and take it to Legend in 2 months.

 This is just wrong, especially if you aspire to play in tournamants, you cannot keep up by grinding, you have to pay. 

Quote from Velrun >>

Quote from 3nnui >>

Quote from Velrun >>

Quote from FakeNorwegian >>

Just quoting a guy i found on the bnet forum.

 

I personally use this definition: "If a game has a PvP element of any sort, and if you can use real money to buy any kind of advantage, then the game is P2W".

DOTA2 for example is not P2W, as nothing you buy has any actual impact on the gameplay. 

HS is P2W, because people who pay money can get good cards more easily and thus have an advantage. For example, I have the priest DK but no Raza, I have the evo Shaman but no Doppelgangster, I have no other DKs nor a LK. All those are disadvantages, that result in worse decks. If I would pay money, I could acquire all these cards one way or another instantly right now, improve my decks and thus my chances of winning.

 

So for me i think its p2w. Just met a guy in rank 19 with 7 legendaries completly destroyed my jade golem that took me 2 weeks to make with dust and opening packs.

 You misunderstood what he said.

You cannot pay to gain any kind of advantage in Hearthstone that you cannot also get by grinding. If you want all the cards, play more.

It has been proven time and time again that HS is not P2W. A really strong player can take a brand new account and only play without paying anything and take it to Legend in 2 months.

 This is just wrong, especially if you aspire to play in tournamants, you cannot keep up by grinding, you have to pay. 

But that has absolutely nothing to do with pay to win :)

If a really strong player (like a Pro player) can take a new account to Legend in 2 months, then HS is not pay to win. You just have to be really good, have a little luck and a lot of time.

If you are not good, then you won’t reach legendary even though you pay a lot.

Technically I would say pay to play. You need to get a good deck. Which there are budget decks. However even if you pay it requires some luck and a decent amount of skill.

Quote from Builder_Bob >>

Quote from Velrun >>

Quote from 3nnui >>

Quote from Velrun >>

Quote from FakeNorwegian >>

Just quoting a guy i found on the bnet forum.

 

I personally use this definition: "If a game has a PvP element of any sort, and if you can use real money to buy any kind of advantage, then the game is P2W".

DOTA2 for example is not P2W, as nothing you buy has any actual impact on the gameplay. 

HS is P2W, because people who pay money can get good cards more easily and thus have an advantage. For example, I have the priest DK but no Raza, I have the evo Shaman but no Doppelgangster, I have no other DKs nor a LK. All those are disadvantages, that result in worse decks. If I would pay money, I could acquire all these cards one way or another instantly right now, improve my decks and thus my chances of winning.

 

So for me i think its p2w. Just met a guy in rank 19 with 7 legendaries completly destroyed my jade golem that took me 2 weeks to make with dust and opening packs.

 You misunderstood what he said.

You cannot pay to gain any kind of advantage in Hearthstone that you cannot also get by grinding. If you want all the cards, play more.

It has been proven time and time again that HS is not P2W. A really strong player can take a brand new account and only play without paying anything and take it to Legend in 2 months.

 This is just wrong, especially if you aspire to play in tournamants, you cannot keep up by grinding, you have to pay. 

But that has absolutely nothing to do with pay to win :)

If a really strong player (like a Pro player) can take a new account to Legend in 2 months, then HS is not pay to win. You just have to be really good, have a little luck and a lot of time.

If you are not good, then you won’t reach legendary even though you pay a lot.

Legend is not the bar of which you measure if the game is pay to win or not. There is always a higher tier. Constructed HS is pay to win. It's just not only pay to win, skill matters as well.

It is Schrödinger‘s game. It is and it isn‘t pay 2 win at same time.

If winning is defined as getting to legend rank or winning x number games in Ranked play, I would say "not P2W".
If you define winning as the ability to participate in tournaments with decent chance of winning against players of equal skill, I would say "P2W". If you're able to maintain 4-5 competitive decks over time without spending a dime, that's truly impressive.

I mean, technically every card game ever made can be considered "pay to win".

Example: Person A and Person B walks into a game-store. Person A buys 5 Booster-Packs for the newest release of Magic:The Gathering, while Person B only buys one.  Person B pulls a Mythic-rare creature that would be great to build a deck around, however, he ends up having much fewer cards than Person A due to the amount of boosters bought. Both Person A and B has gotten cards, but because Person A has more cards, he can be more flexible when building his deck when compared to Person B.

This is mostly how I find that it goes. Some people really enjoy opening multiple packs, but might end up not getting anything special, while some others opens up only one or two packs a month or so and pulls great stuff every time. The more you buy, the better chances of getting good cards, of course, but it's all luck.