i was wondering if instead of rotating 3 sets at the beginning of each year, if instead with each new expansion we see the oldest expansion rotate out. then when we have sets like witchwood, where the meta stayed basically the same aside from baku and genn. it would have shaken things up more having rotated out a set.
another thing might be for blizzard to have every 2 months after a expansion a rotation of a set. then every 2 months a set either comes or leaves.
do you think either of these systems would be better than the one we have now? it would mean that with expansions like rastakhan which come in last, they will still stay in for the same amount of time as the first set of the year. what do you think?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Rejoice, for even in death, you have become children of Thanos.
I think it would be better to have a new expac with less cards every 2 months and have a rotation every 6 to maintain the feeling of freshness in standard.
A better idea is to stop printing cards that imbalance the game. Things like the deathknights, even-odd gimmick, Reno, sure they are great for sales, but then the game turns to crap. It looks like they may have finally taken the hint with RR, so here's to hoping for a good meta when the trash gets taken out in April (well at least some of the trash)
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Free to try and find a game, dealing cards for sorrow, cards for pain.
I actually think both or either of your ideas are better than the current format. Especially when you’ll have a set like KoC in standard for a year and 4 months, while Un’Goro is around for a full two years.
I was always thinking of just implementing a mode that allows players which era of hearthstone you like to play. I myself would just like to play vanilla only for a bit, then maybe ass in gnomes and goblins and blackrock mountain. The problem I can see with this though is lack of interest. I could be the only one at the table interested in playing older formats resulting in eternal queues.
I do ponder that. However, every time I do I realize that a set that REALLLLLYYY needs to go would end up staying far too long.
For example, I thought of it around the time of Un'Goro, then realized it would mean that not only would TGT (with things like totem golem) would've still been around but Mean Streets would get even MORE time to stink up the meta.
Even this time, the Spring Rotation would mean only Un'Goro would leave, meaning we would still have Frozen Throne and Kobolds for another 3-6 months. The meta really isn't going to change until Kobolds leaves given it's insane power level. I'm not sure the game can take another year of that.
Wait, would this mean each expansion would be around for two years or one year and one month?
I'm assuming 2 years. For example, Next spring (Spr 2019) would knock out just Un'Goro (Spr 2017). summer would knock out Frozen Throne (sum 2017) and so on.
Is the rotation really the problem? I don't think so. We had metas that constantly evolved and metas that were stale. The problem was polarized meta and imbalanced cards that dominated. Blizzard needs to finally skip on printing those cards for the sales and return to balanced out designs. KaC and the DKs of KfT broke the meta, not the rotation. If you rotate after 6 months, standard players have their cash grabbed even more by Blizzard.
I think blizzard should rotate the expansion more often. For example standard mode can keep 5 expansions maximum at all time, and rotate the oldest expansion when each new expansion is released.
This implantation will make all the expansions have same life time in standard mode.
in my opinion they should rotate a set with every release. We would always have Basic+Classic+3Sets which seems to be the ideal amount of cards. A method like this would guarantee a 1 year cycle for every expansion.
Allowing in Standard just the last 2 or 3 expansions would probably keep the meta more fresh and tbh, the way they designed the Year of xxx marking a big rotation is just kinda stupid, simply because not all the sets are played for the same amount of time and I don't really understand why, it's just illogical.
They just need to roll balancing patches every month and it would be fine. I know changing cards historically in tcg was "last resort" move but that was mainly because of physical cards, now in this fully digital game there's no downside at all.
I think Mid-Term expansions would be better, if you want to refresh the meta more frequently (and this would affect Wild too).
Shifting rotations serve the purpose of evolving some archetypes slowly, in time keeping players hyped that a given archetype may actually turn good.
More squared releases, with all-in design archetypes and synergies would probably be bad in terms of playerbase hype and addiction. So they'll never do that, because it means less money.
I think a small set every month would be awesome. Like the amount of cards we used to get with the solo adventures each month would make each season feel different the meta gets solved and stale in a month so this would help keep it moving at a constant pace
Bring back one big expansion a year and smaller adventures, allows players to have relatively close collections and much more focus on balancing smaller sets of cards.
Bring back one big expansion a year and smaller adventures, allows players to have relatively close collections and much more focus on balancing smaller sets of cards.
The last adventure/expansion combination was One Night and Mean Streets.
I complain about Knights and Kobolds but I'd take 2 more years of this set, literally 0 expansions and just these cards, than a month more of the Winter 2017 meta.
I actually at first had a softer version of that above line, then realized it wasn't accurate so I had to rewrite it a few times. I'm actually shocked that THIS is how I really feel about it. I guess it's official that it's my most hated meta. I only hated the first month of Hearthstone more and that's only because I was so new and bad at deck design/playing/collecting/ANYTHING to enjoy the game.
In any case, Adventures seem to give the designers a LOT less design room to make cards and we end up with very bad or very broken cards. it also cramped them in how they designed single player content.
I'd rather have smaller sets in slightly shorter durations rather than 3 huge sets every year. I mean really all those filler cards are a bit of a testament that it isn't that efficient of a design strategy. They could then rotate once every half year-ish or something. that way standard would remain fresher, rather than narrow down to the same archetypes but with a few new cards every expansion.
Just think about this: we still have to have a standard rotation, and after that we will have to deal with another year of odd/even decks everywhere.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Why u hav to be mad? is only card gaem.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
i was wondering if instead of rotating 3 sets at the beginning of each year, if instead with each new expansion we see the oldest expansion rotate out. then when we have sets like witchwood, where the meta stayed basically the same aside from baku and genn. it would have shaken things up more having rotated out a set.
another thing might be for blizzard to have every 2 months after a expansion a rotation of a set. then every 2 months a set either comes or leaves.
do you think either of these systems would be better than the one we have now? it would mean that with expansions like rastakhan which come in last, they will still stay in for the same amount of time as the first set of the year. what do you think?
Rejoice, for even in death, you have become children of Thanos.
I think it would be better to have a new expac with less cards every 2 months and have a rotation every 6 to maintain the feeling of freshness in standard.
A better idea is to stop printing cards that imbalance the game. Things like the deathknights, even-odd gimmick, Reno, sure they are great for sales, but then the game turns to crap. It looks like they may have finally taken the hint with RR, so here's to hoping for a good meta when the trash gets taken out in April (well at least some of the trash)
Free to try and find a game, dealing cards for sorrow, cards for pain.
I actually think both or either of your ideas are better than the current format. Especially when you’ll have a set like KoC in standard for a year and 4 months, while Un’Goro is around for a full two years.
I was always thinking of just implementing a mode that allows players which era of hearthstone you like to play. I myself would just like to play vanilla only for a bit, then maybe ass in gnomes and goblins and blackrock mountain. The problem I can see with this though is lack of interest. I could be the only one at the table interested in playing older formats resulting in eternal queues.
I do ponder that. However, every time I do I realize that a set that REALLLLLYYY needs to go would end up staying far too long.
For example, I thought of it around the time of Un'Goro, then realized it would mean that not only would TGT (with things like totem golem) would've still been around but Mean Streets would get even MORE time to stink up the meta.
Even this time, the Spring Rotation would mean only Un'Goro would leave, meaning we would still have Frozen Throne and Kobolds for another 3-6 months. The meta really isn't going to change until Kobolds leaves given it's insane power level. I'm not sure the game can take another year of that.
Maybe we can come back to the idea next year.
One does not simply walk into Mordor,
unless they want to be the best they can be.
Wait, would this mean each expansion would be around for two years or one year and one month?
Unpopular opinion: Rogue is OP
I'm assuming 2 years. For example, Next spring (Spr 2019) would knock out just Un'Goro (Spr 2017). summer would knock out Frozen Throne (sum 2017) and so on.
One does not simply walk into Mordor,
unless they want to be the best they can be.
Is the rotation really the problem? I don't think so. We had metas that constantly evolved and metas that were stale. The problem was polarized meta and imbalanced cards that dominated. Blizzard needs to finally skip on printing those cards for the sales and return to balanced out designs. KaC and the DKs of KfT broke the meta, not the rotation. If you rotate after 6 months, standard players have their cash grabbed even more by Blizzard.
I think blizzard should rotate the expansion more often. For example standard mode can keep 5 expansions maximum at all time, and rotate the oldest expansion when each new expansion is released.
This implantation will make all the expansions have same life time in standard mode.
in my opinion they should rotate a set with every release. We would always have Basic+Classic+3Sets which seems to be the ideal amount of cards. A method like this would guarantee a 1 year cycle for every expansion.
Allowing in Standard just the last 2 or 3 expansions would probably keep the meta more fresh and tbh, the way they designed the Year of xxx marking a big rotation is just kinda stupid, simply because not all the sets are played for the same amount of time and I don't really understand why, it's just illogical.
That would be awesome, one rotates in, one rotates out. It would be quite fresh that way.
They just need to roll balancing patches every month and it would be fine. I know changing cards historically in tcg was "last resort" move but that was mainly because of physical cards, now in this fully digital game there's no downside at all.
I think Mid-Term expansions would be better, if you want to refresh the meta more frequently (and this would affect Wild too).
Shifting rotations serve the purpose of evolving some archetypes slowly, in time keeping players hyped that a given archetype may actually turn good.
More squared releases, with all-in design archetypes and synergies would probably be bad in terms of playerbase hype and addiction. So they'll never do that, because it means less money.
Im glad that i am wild player. Never cared about rotation. I can play what ever deck i wish (for lock).
I think a small set every month would be awesome. Like the amount of cards we used to get with the solo adventures each month would make each season feel different the meta gets solved and stale in a month so this would help keep it moving at a constant pace
Bring back one big expansion a year and smaller adventures, allows players to have relatively close collections and much more focus on balancing smaller sets of cards.
The last adventure/expansion combination was One Night and Mean Streets.
I complain about Knights and Kobolds but I'd take 2 more years of this set, literally 0 expansions and just these cards, than a month more of the Winter 2017 meta.
I actually at first had a softer version of that above line, then realized it wasn't accurate so I had to rewrite it a few times. I'm actually shocked that THIS is how I really feel about it. I guess it's official that it's my most hated meta. I only hated the first month of Hearthstone more and that's only because I was so new and bad at deck design/playing/collecting/ANYTHING to enjoy the game.
In any case, Adventures seem to give the designers a LOT less design room to make cards and we end up with very bad or very broken cards. it also cramped them in how they designed single player content.
One does not simply walk into Mordor,
unless they want to be the best they can be.
I'd rather have smaller sets in slightly shorter durations rather than 3 huge sets every year. I mean really all those filler cards are a bit of a testament that it isn't that efficient of a design strategy. They could then rotate once every half year-ish or something. that way standard would remain fresher, rather than narrow down to the same archetypes but with a few new cards every expansion.
Just think about this: we still have to have a standard rotation, and after that we will have to deal with another year of odd/even decks everywhere.
Why u hav to be mad? is only card gaem.