The question is should Blizzard implement a public test server similarly to what they do for WOW and Overwatch so that players can test cards and their impact on the game (meta, etc.) and allow Blizzard to modify the cards as needed based on data they are seeing in the test environment?
The number of nerfs, tweaks and other changes made to HS over the years has illustrated the HS dev team is not as effective as we'd like at testing internally new cards before going live with them. The number of potential interactions are just too many for a small team to play test manually. Perhaps one day they can use Google's DeepMind to play test but in the meantime, one idea would be to implement a public test server. Blizzard already uses the public test server approach for games such as WOW and Overwatch. While there may be various pros and cons to consider both from Blizzard's perspective and players, a public test server may be a win-win option for everyone.
I do not think, there will ever be a test server. They need the hype before the expansion, when would you start the test server? Right after the last card dump, so people can "play test" the cards for 2 weeks and feel disappointed so they wont buy packs at the launch? Also Blizzard takes a looooot of time usually to do changes (even tho, lately they were quite fast and with announcing them weeeks before), so evaluation of the results and then taking actions.. again a lot of time.
I do not think, there will ever be a test server. They need the hype before the expansion, when would you start the test server? Right after the last card dump, so people can "play test" the cards for 2 weeks and feel disappointed so they wont buy packs at the launch? Also Blizzard takes a looooot of time usually to do changes (even tho, lately they were quite fast and with announcing them weeeks before), so evaluation of the results and then taking actions.. again a lot of time.
Same could apply to WOW or Overwatch. They need hype for the new content - new raids, new items, new characters, etc. But yet they still have a public test server approach to both games. As I said, there are pros and cons for all involved but seems like its a net win-win. Remember they did a very long beta test of the original card set before it went live. Didn't seem to create alot of problems with hype when it went live.
Why can't people understand that this would be impossible as well as pointless? In games like D3, it makes sense because playing on the PTR may be fun to get a glimpse of the new content, but it isn't real. You don't get to keep the drops, you don't get to keep the XP, progress made isn't retained and you have to do it all again when it goes live. Last time I checked, you buy cards in HS, not earn them through successful gameplay, so the PTR just becomes an early release because everything you learn about the new cards, you keep. This brings up point two, the non-representativeness of the endeavor. Since only a sub-class of players would participate (or be allowed to), a true meta will not form, reducing the effectiveness of it as a shake-out. Contrary to popular belief/forum narcissism, the devs are likely more focused on the 20-16 experience than anything having to do with the pittance of players at 5-L. Yep, the supermajority of player never break 16, don't use HSReplay, and only use the front page of this site to netdeck, if they actually have the cards to do so.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Free to try and find a game, dealing cards for sorrow, cards for pain.
Why can't people understand that this would be impossible as well as pointless? In games like D3, it makes sense because playing on the PTR may be fun to get a glimpse of the new content, but it isn't real. You don't get to keep the drops, you don't get to keep the XP, progress made isn't retained and you have to do it all again when it goes live. Last time I checked, you buy cards in HS, not earn them through successful gameplay, so the PTR just becomes an early release because everything you learn about the new cards, you keep. This brings up point two, the non-representativeness of the endeavor. Since only a sub-class of players would participate (or be allowed to), a true meta will not form, reducing the effectiveness of it as a shake-out. Contrary to popular belief/forum narcissism, the devs are likely more focused on the 20-16 experience than anything having to do with the pittance of players at 5-L. Yep, the supermajority of player never break 16, don't use HSReplay, and only use the front page of this site to netdeck, if they actually have the cards to do so.
Of course it's not impossible so that's just plain wrong. As for whether it's "pointless", that also seems inaccurate. You may disagree with the point of a PTR but it would have a point. The PTR model works quite well for WOW and OW. Players that play on the PTR are usually the more dedicated players including in particular the raiders in the case of WOW and professional and hardcore comp players in OW. We can expect the same to be true of a HS PTR. So that's isn't a credible objection to a HS PTR.
And HS has never been only a model where you "buy cards, not earn them through successful gameplay". Do you even play the game? HS's mode is you can brute force card acquisition with money or with playing time. It's quite possible to earn all the cards you want without ever spending a dime though it takes longer than spending money.
And yes the PTR allows players to gain exposure to cards but the same is true for WOW PTR, OW PTR, and every other beta testing that's ever occurred in the history of gaming. Obviously, you'd still need to acquire the cards through normal methods on the live server. Any cards you use or acquire on the PTR would not be available on the live servers. I didn't state that explicitly because I assumed that'd be so obvious as to not require explanation but apparently not!
Casuals already complain that meta gets figured too fast. Imagine having it figured weeks before the expansion come out.
Probably the only real credible complaint I've read so far in the responses. The meta usually settles within two weeks of release so it's not that huge of a benefit to have an unsettled meta when an expansion goes live. But the reality is what is the lesser evil? Constant nerfs and changes due to inadequate internal testing or perhaps losing that unsettled meta experience for the first week or two after release? I'd say the latter is definitely the lesser evil.
Casuals already complain that meta gets figured too fast. Imagine having it figured weeks before the expansion come out.
Probably the only real credible complaint I've read so far in the responses. The meta usually settles within two weeks of release so it's not that huge of a benefit to have an unsettled meta when an expansion goes live. But the reality is what is the lesser evil? Constant nerfs and changes due to inadequate internal testing or perhaps losing that unsettled meta experience for the first week or two after release? I'd say the latter is definitely the lesser evil.
I don't understand what is the fundamental problem you have with nerfs.
Nope. Hype is too important in HS. Fundamental actually.
At most, they should hire more internal testers.
Hype is important in WOW too but they have a PTR. Also, most players wouldn't even bother with the PTR so it'd have no impact on them.
People would already know which cards and decks are viable. Actually the whole first phase of meta evolution would be spoiled entirely.
Every expansion would start with defined decks and a nearly-stale meta, compromising the whole value of a new set, and the required effort to design it.
It's not comparable to the hype in wow, at all.
It's hugely impactful for everyone, as long as it is public.
Test Realm Servers are there to search for major bugs, not to actually test the balance of things: the numbers of players on a PTR is so small compared to the live one that hardly any evidence of unbalanced situation will be shown (and if some will pop up then they've must been so big that the Devs should have already seen that coming by their own).
Balance patches should always be done after collecting datas from the live servers, where the population is massive and every kind of interaction will be actually take place.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
For what profit is it to a man, if he gains the world and loses his own soul?
Don't need that, what is needed is balance patches and nerfs happen a lot more faster and often, no this BS "We keep an eye in hunter and don't do anything about it."
I do not think, there will ever be a test server. They need the hype before the expansion, when would you start the test server? Right after the last card dump, so people can "play test" the cards for 2 weeks and feel disappointed so they wont buy packs at the launch? Also Blizzard takes a looooot of time usually to do changes (even tho, lately they were quite fast and with announcing them weeeks before), so evaluation of the results and then taking actions.. again a lot of time.
Same could apply to WOW or Overwatch. They need hype for the new content - new raids, new items, new characters, etc. But yet they still have a public test server approach to both games. As I said, there are pros and cons for all involved but seems like its a net win-win. Remember they did a very long beta test of the original card set before it went live. Didn't seem to create alot of problems with hype when it went live.
No, in Hearthstone you need cards to play, in WoW (and OW; well I dont play OW but I assume its just cosmetic skins) you only need a subscription which you pay per month. So new content does not affect the old content at all (well, it kinda does, when ppl with new gear go to lower instances or something), big updates like WoW expansion do that, but they have betas for that. For a cardgame like Hearthstone its totally different. Imo you really cant compare it, you need the hype, you NEED THE NEW FRESH META. I enjoy the first few weeks of a new expansion the most, because the meta shapes alot, after that I prefer to play arena.
Why can't people understand that this would be impossible as well as pointless? In games like D3, it makes sense because playing on the PTR may be fun to get a glimpse of the new content, but it isn't real. You don't get to keep the drops, you don't get to keep the XP, progress made isn't retained and you have to do it all again when it goes live. Last time I checked, you buy cards in HS, not earn them through successful gameplay, so the PTR just becomes an early release because everything you learn about the new cards, you keep. This brings up point two, the non-representativeness of the endeavor. Since only a sub-class of players would participate (or be allowed to), a true meta will not form, reducing the effectiveness of it as a shake-out. Contrary to popular belief/forum narcissism, the devs are likely more focused on the 20-16 experience than anything having to do with the pittance of players at 5-L. Yep, the supermajority of player never break 16, don't use HSReplay, and only use the front page of this site to netdeck, if they actually have the cards to do so.
Of course it's not impossible so that's just plain wrong. As for whether it's "pointless", that also seems inaccurate. You may disagree with the point of a PTR but it would have a point. The PTR model works quite well for WOW and OW. Players that play on the PTR are usually the more dedicated players including in particular the raiders in the case of WOW and professional and hardcore comp players in OW. We can expect the same to be true of a HS PTR. So that's isn't a credible objection to a HS PTR.
And HS has never been only a model where you "buy cards, not earn them through successful gameplay". Do you even play the game? HS's mode is you can brute force card acquisition with money or with playing time. It's quite possible to earn all the cards you want without ever spending a dime though it takes longer than spending money.
And yes the PTR allows players to gain exposure to cards but the same is true for WOW PTR, OW PTR, and every other beta testing that's ever occurred in the history of gaming. Obviously, you'd still need to acquire the cards through normal methods on the live server. Any cards you use or acquire on the PTR would not be available on the live servers. I didn't state that explicitly because I assumed that'd be so obvious as to not require explanation but apparently not!
I don't see any credible objections in your post.
Sorry, you don't get it, but it's simple. 'Untenable' might be a better word than impossible, but either way, it's a bad idea for the game. Why buy the new expansion, the strong cards are already revealed on the PTR, the rest can be ignored. In D3 I may learn from PTR that the Mystic Spear of Skewering is the best wizard weapon, but I still need to run dungeons for weeks to get one, not so in HS. So you are wrong - I do keep what I get in the PTR - my knowledge and experience of what cards work and what cards are crap, don't even need to play PTR, people will post the results right here and on youtube.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Free to try and find a game, dealing cards for sorrow, cards for pain.
I think it would help with the balance, yes, but there is just too many negatives for them to do it. First, i believe they wont do it, cause they would "look bad", like they cant handle it themselves. Which we know that is a fact ... and would actually probably give them some respect in players eyes making them look like they want to take things more seriously, but yeah. Then the sales would probably tank, when ppl would figure out decks before the actual release, so majority of ppl would just craft those few important cards and not buy packs at all, let alone pre-order, thats most likely the biggest issue why they cant/wont do it with this title and from a business perspective, i cant blame them on this one.
It's sort of been mentioned already by people who say that a PTR would 'kill the hype' surrounding a new expansion, but a PTR would also require a complete change of schedule for Blizzard.
Currently, cards are revealed up until about a week before expansion launch, often less. As an example, Rastakhan's Rumble released on the 4th of December, and the final cards were revealed on the 28th of November, 6 days before. Having a PTR for less than a week before the launch of the expansion is entirely useless - patches take time to pass inspection, you can't just change cards on the fly, so even if they could gather enough data from a PTR in 6 days to determine any cards that might need nerfing (they couldn't) they wouldn't be able to implement these changes without pushing back the release of the game.
To even make a PTR worth it, they'd need to open it, with all cards available, about a month before an expansion launched. At that point before Rastakhan's Rumble, we knew the premise of the expansion and 16/135 cards. Up until about two weeks before launch, that's all we knew. It just wouldn't work. When people say a PTR would kill the hype, we mean the hype would be dead two weeks before the expansion even launched, maybe earlier if they still wanted to reveal all the cards before the PTR.
This is all, of course, under the assumption that a majority of Hearthstone players would play the PTR. It wouldn't require anyone to play it to kill the hype, since they've revealed the cards a month in advance anyway, but it would require a large amount of active players to play it to gather enough data to be able to make changes to cards. Otherwise the PTR would just be a big performance while they wait for the actual good data of the live servers to tell them what the actual meta looks like.
So no, they shouldn't implement a PTR. It would kill the hype, solve the meta and not even accomplish anything worthwhile since not enough people would play it to obtain worthwhile data.
The question is should Blizzard implement a public test server similarly to what they do for WOW and Overwatch so that players can test cards and their impact on the game (meta, etc.) and allow Blizzard to modify the cards as needed based on data they are seeing in the test environment?
The number of nerfs, tweaks and other changes made to HS over the years has illustrated the HS dev team is not as effective as we'd like at testing internally new cards before going live with them. The number of potential interactions are just too many for a small team to play test manually. Perhaps one day they can use Google's DeepMind to play test but in the meantime, one idea would be to implement a public test server. Blizzard already uses the public test server approach for games such as WOW and Overwatch. While there may be various pros and cons to consider both from Blizzard's perspective and players, a public test server may be a win-win option for everyone.
I do not think, there will ever be a test server. They need the hype before the expansion, when would you start the test server? Right after the last card dump, so people can "play test" the cards for 2 weeks and feel disappointed so they wont buy packs at the launch? Also Blizzard takes a looooot of time usually to do changes (even tho, lately they were quite fast and with announcing them weeeks before), so evaluation of the results and then taking actions.. again a lot of time.
Same could apply to WOW or Overwatch. They need hype for the new content - new raids, new items, new characters, etc. But yet they still have a public test server approach to both games. As I said, there are pros and cons for all involved but seems like its a net win-win. Remember they did a very long beta test of the original card set before it went live. Didn't seem to create alot of problems with hype when it went live.
Seems like bad idea test the cards then get bored and not buy packs.
Why can't people understand that this would be impossible as well as pointless? In games like D3, it makes sense because playing on the PTR may be fun to get a glimpse of the new content, but it isn't real. You don't get to keep the drops, you don't get to keep the XP, progress made isn't retained and you have to do it all again when it goes live. Last time I checked, you buy cards in HS, not earn them through successful gameplay, so the PTR just becomes an early release because everything you learn about the new cards, you keep. This brings up point two, the non-representativeness of the endeavor. Since only a sub-class of players would participate (or be allowed to), a true meta will not form, reducing the effectiveness of it as a shake-out. Contrary to popular belief/forum narcissism, the devs are likely more focused on the 20-16 experience than anything having to do with the pittance of players at 5-L. Yep, the supermajority of player never break 16, don't use HSReplay, and only use the front page of this site to netdeck, if they actually have the cards to do so.
Free to try and find a game, dealing cards for sorrow, cards for pain.
No.
Casuals already complain that meta gets figured too fast. Imagine having it figured weeks before the expansion come out.
Nope. Hype is too important in HS. Fundamental actually.
At most, they should hire more internal testers.
Of course it's not impossible so that's just plain wrong. As for whether it's "pointless", that also seems inaccurate. You may disagree with the point of a PTR but it would have a point. The PTR model works quite well for WOW and OW. Players that play on the PTR are usually the more dedicated players including in particular the raiders in the case of WOW and professional and hardcore comp players in OW. We can expect the same to be true of a HS PTR. So that's isn't a credible objection to a HS PTR.
And HS has never been only a model where you "buy cards, not earn them through successful gameplay". Do you even play the game? HS's mode is you can brute force card acquisition with money or with playing time. It's quite possible to earn all the cards you want without ever spending a dime though it takes longer than spending money.
And yes the PTR allows players to gain exposure to cards but the same is true for WOW PTR, OW PTR, and every other beta testing that's ever occurred in the history of gaming. Obviously, you'd still need to acquire the cards through normal methods on the live server. Any cards you use or acquire on the PTR would not be available on the live servers. I didn't state that explicitly because I assumed that'd be so obvious as to not require explanation but apparently not!
I don't see any credible objections in your post.
Hype is important in WOW too but they have a PTR. Also, most players wouldn't even bother with the PTR so it'd have no impact on them.
Probably the only real credible complaint I've read so far in the responses. The meta usually settles within two weeks of release so it's not that huge of a benefit to have an unsettled meta when an expansion goes live. But the reality is what is the lesser evil? Constant nerfs and changes due to inadequate internal testing or perhaps losing that unsettled meta experience for the first week or two after release? I'd say the latter is definitely the lesser evil.
I don't understand what is the fundamental problem you have with nerfs.
People would already know which cards and decks are viable. Actually the whole first phase of meta evolution would be spoiled entirely.
Every expansion would start with defined decks and a nearly-stale meta, compromising the whole value of a new set, and the required effort to design it.
It's not comparable to the hype in wow, at all.
It's hugely impactful for everyone, as long as it is public.
It’s fun to play for real with the new cards. A PTR would spoil this.
Dumb idea.
Test Realm Servers are there to search for major bugs, not to actually test the balance of things: the numbers of players on a PTR is so small compared to the live one that hardly any evidence of unbalanced situation will be shown (and if some will pop up then they've must been so big that the Devs should have already seen that coming by their own).
Balance patches should always be done after collecting datas from the live servers, where the population is massive and every kind of interaction will be actually take place.
For what profit is it to a man, if he gains the world and loses his own soul?
Don't need that, what is needed is balance patches and nerfs happen a lot more faster and often, no this BS "We keep an eye in hunter and don't do anything about it."
No, and they shouldn't have those early release tavern brawls either.
No, in Hearthstone you need cards to play, in WoW (and OW; well I dont play OW but I assume its just cosmetic skins) you only need a subscription which you pay per month. So new content does not affect the old content at all (well, it kinda does, when ppl with new gear go to lower instances or something), big updates like WoW expansion do that, but they have betas for that. For a cardgame like Hearthstone its totally different. Imo you really cant compare it, you need the hype, you NEED THE NEW FRESH META. I enjoy the first few weeks of a new expansion the most, because the meta shapes alot, after that I prefer to play arena.
Sorry, you don't get it, but it's simple. 'Untenable' might be a better word than impossible, but either way, it's a bad idea for the game. Why buy the new expansion, the strong cards are already revealed on the PTR, the rest can be ignored. In D3 I may learn from PTR that the Mystic Spear of Skewering is the best wizard weapon, but I still need to run dungeons for weeks to get one, not so in HS. So you are wrong - I do keep what I get in the PTR - my knowledge and experience of what cards work and what cards are crap, don't even need to play PTR, people will post the results right here and on youtube.
Free to try and find a game, dealing cards for sorrow, cards for pain.
I think it would help with the balance, yes, but there is just too many negatives for them to do it. First, i believe they wont do it, cause they would "look bad", like they cant handle it themselves. Which we know that is a fact ... and would actually probably give them some respect in players eyes making them look like they want to take things more seriously, but yeah. Then the sales would probably tank, when ppl would figure out decks before the actual release, so majority of ppl would just craft those few important cards and not buy packs at all, let alone pre-order, thats most likely the biggest issue why they cant/wont do it with this title and from a business perspective, i cant blame them on this one.
- Click Here To Join Us On Discord! -
It's sort of been mentioned already by people who say that a PTR would 'kill the hype' surrounding a new expansion, but a PTR would also require a complete change of schedule for Blizzard.
Currently, cards are revealed up until about a week before expansion launch, often less. As an example, Rastakhan's Rumble released on the 4th of December, and the final cards were revealed on the 28th of November, 6 days before. Having a PTR for less than a week before the launch of the expansion is entirely useless - patches take time to pass inspection, you can't just change cards on the fly, so even if they could gather enough data from a PTR in 6 days to determine any cards that might need nerfing (they couldn't) they wouldn't be able to implement these changes without pushing back the release of the game.
To even make a PTR worth it, they'd need to open it, with all cards available, about a month before an expansion launched. At that point before Rastakhan's Rumble, we knew the premise of the expansion and 16/135 cards. Up until about two weeks before launch, that's all we knew. It just wouldn't work. When people say a PTR would kill the hype, we mean the hype would be dead two weeks before the expansion even launched, maybe earlier if they still wanted to reveal all the cards before the PTR.
This is all, of course, under the assumption that a majority of Hearthstone players would play the PTR. It wouldn't require anyone to play it to kill the hype, since they've revealed the cards a month in advance anyway, but it would require a large amount of active players to play it to gather enough data to be able to make changes to cards. Otherwise the PTR would just be a big performance while they wait for the actual good data of the live servers to tell them what the actual meta looks like.
So no, they shouldn't implement a PTR. It would kill the hype, solve the meta and not even accomplish anything worthwhile since not enough people would play it to obtain worthwhile data.
You can find me here! Good luck everyone!