Hearthpwn

 

Blizzard should just make certain cards not draftable with certain cards, with restriction. For example:

 AVIANNA: cannot use draft together with Star aligner in the same deck.

Problem solve. This card still playable with other combo decks, such as C'thun OTK decks.

 

Naga sea witch: Cannot use together with mountain Giant in the same deck.

GIant warlock Deck becomes less OP.

 

Giggling inventor: Cannot use together with Baky the Mooneater.

This card will still be playable but not insanely strong in odd-only decks.

 

Iceblock: Cannot be drafted together with Open the waygate.

Players will feel less frustrated by all the stalling tools the opponents have.

 

Call to arms: Cannot be drafted together with Genn Greymane.

Card will still be strong in OTK paladin deck.

 

I think that Blizzard should seriously consider this method instead of nerfing those cards into oblivion. Blizzard will need to consider all the possible OP combination in wild with each new expansion. Banning certain cards to be used together is the best way to help with design space in future. Thoughts?

 

 

 

Insanely dumb idea.

I mean, a lot of terrible ideas has been thrown around in response to the nerfs, but this is just extremely stupid

Quote from Akrosian94 >>

I mean, a lot of terrible ideas has been thrown around in response to the nerfs, but this is just extremely stupid

 mind to explain why? A lot of people think that nerfing giggling inventor to 7 mana is too much. This action will kill the card. Why don't we just don't let it be played in the OP deck (odd decks, or quest rogue) but still make the card playable in other decks?

Quote from swanky_tiger86 >>

 mind to explain why? A lot of people think that nerfing giggling inventor to 7 mana is too much. This action will kill the card. Why don't we just don't let it be played in the OP deck (odd decks, or quest rogue) but still make the card playable in other decks?

 It's a dumb idea because it is such a specific restriction that can lead to a lot of dumb changes. If you go and restrict one deck for having a strong combo, then why not restrict the next one, the one after that, etc? All this would do is make the community yell at blizzard to restrict more cards or not restrict other cards. Not to mention, it doesn't even address the strength of a card in other decks. Giggling doesn't just see play in odd decks, with the main abuser of it being Quest rogue. Same thing goes for CTA as it just makes any aggressive strategy easy to accomplish.

This idea also is a huge middle finger to deck building. The point of deck building is to feel unrestricted to be able to put whatever one would want to into the deck and imagine making a deck based around some form of synergy between cards only to realize that you literally can't build it.

Blizzard wants people to make their own decks. Just because we are too lazy to do that and resort to netdecking doesn't mean the statement before isn't true. Your idea goes against that phylosophy. If Blizz restricts cards on certain decks, they will be telling us how to play the game, instead of us playing it how we want.

Hence some people calling your idea stupid.

WYou don't know the meaning of restriction in TCGs. Restrictions is to be able to play a card with less copies than originally intended.

The problem in HS regarding to that, is that cards are already very limited (2 for non-legendaries, and 1 for legendaries), restricting them even less is not worthy. For that, just ban the card.

In MTG is different, because you may have up to 4 copies (with some exceptions) of any card, regardless rarity, and restgricting cards only affects the vintage format.

In shadowverse, you may have up to 3 copies of any card, regardless of rarity. And they have restricted some cards in unlimited to 1-of, because of power levels.

What HS needs is that the dev team stops using a policy of "we don't want people to be mad for nerfing cards", and start doing monthly balance changes. There will be always someone mad for any change made to the game, but the necessity of the majority outweighs the necessity of the individuals.

Call to Arms is now 5 mana, and wouldn’t be played with Genn.

Dumb idea. Actually no, it is just a childish idea...

Okay so kill combo decks but not touch aggro or control?

This guy is not allowed to post in forums anymore

-sincerely, Blizzard

don't listen to them op, that wouldn't be the worst idea. Restricting a few well known OP options would let people come up with different decks instead of only playing op ones

This would be a bad idea because it would be too confusing to new or casual players, which is the vast majority of the playerbase. While the idea is decent in theory, it goes completely against the core values of Hearthstone, and those values are what made Hearthstone popular and successful in the first place.

Quote from maroon5five >>

This would be a bad idea because it would be too confusing to new or casual players, which is the vast majority of the playerbase. While the idea is decent in theory, it goes completely against the core values of Hearthstone, and those values are what made Hearthstone popular and successful in the first place.

Quote from El_Sabidon >>

Blizzard wants people to make their own decks. Just because we are too lazy to do that and resort to netdecking doesn't mean the statement before isn't true. Your idea goes against that phylosophy. If Blizz restricts cards on certain decks, they will be telling us how to play the game, instead of us playing it how we want.

Hence some people calling your idea stupid.

  I think it should be said that this^ is how you should explain to someone why their idea might not work, instead of just saying 'that's really dumb' like too many of the other responses to the op's post are doing.

So you want to reduce creativity in the game (netdecking aside) by forcing the game to restrict what freedom players have when deckbuilding?

Why not just predetermine everybody's decks instead?

Guys chill it's just a suggestion xD

It’s convoluted and restrictive.  It’s also a bandaid solution that a nerf would better address for future design space.

You then have to go through every interaction and decide on all combos that are offensive.  It will lead to people crafting not knowing they can’t make the deck they want.  Would lead to far more problems and anger in the community.

Rotating restrictions would be awesome for the meta. Think about it, with card restrictions changing every couple weeks, the meta would be constantly evolving, and we would get to use all out cards in our collections!! Then you8 could do "rooms" with bans or whatever. Variety. The spice of life!

Quote from parishbishop >>

Rotating restrictions would be awesome for the meta. Think about it, with card restrictions changing every couple weeks, the meta would be constantly evolving, and we would get to use all out cards in our collections!! Then you8 could do "rooms" with bans or whatever. Variety. The spice of life!

 I like the idea of enabling a player driven ‘room’ where you can set certain restrictions or rules, but not changing the way standard works.  Wildly changing metas and restricted card access makes crafting so much more of a gamble.  Then you also have issues with the precident of dust refunds for nerfs, blizzard doesn’t want to do those on a weekly basis.  

So yes on a custom game mode, no on restricting the base play mode.