Anybody else starting to get worried about the amount of power creep in GvG?
The first round of card releases I thought, yeah these are good but not standout. They seem to be fun options but they aren't consistently better than our current options. But that doesn't seem to be the case anymore. It feels like each card that is released is on par with the best cards currently in the game.
I'm seriously starting to worry that it will become quickly apparent that without GvG cards, you simply won't compete on the ladder.
This is only half the set we're seeing. Spoilers are more fun when you show off the more powerful/interesting cards. Chances are the other half of the set isn't as powerful.
Power creep is inevitable in TCGs unfortunately. This has always been the case. If new cards are weaker/on equal power level with older cards then people have less of an incentive to buy/play the new cards.
I don't agree. Yes Gaz is crazy because it's health pool is so high that it requires premium removal, otherwise it trades for 2-4 minions or does crazy damage to the face. However, as a warrior that just means that in the hunter matchup I'll save an execute for it. Currently the best thing to execute are the Svannah's or some smaller minion if I get a really slow start, so it's not that big of a deal.
Hunters may start running more Tundra Rhino which will hurt a lot, especially if they can combo that with a wild pyro or elven archer
Power creep is inevitable in TCGs unfortunately. This has always been the case. If new cards are weaker/on equal power level with older cards then people have less of an incentive to buy/play the new cards.
Basically this is the reason. Also there are plenty of strong cards in the classic set, but there has to be a reason to play new cards.
Power creep is inevitable in TCGs unfortunately. This has always been the case. If new cards are weaker/on equal power level with older cards then people have less of an incentive to buy/play the new cards.
I think the general concern is more about the rate at which power creep seems to be occurring. People feel as if its too much for the first expansion.
TBH, I hadn't even seen Gahz yet when I posted this. I think he is okay. I think all the legendaries they've previewed are fine. Legendaries should be powerful. They don't seem imbalanced at all. IMO
And I understand that there needs to be some power creep but if it is too drastic then this game will very quickly become unplayable to newer players. It should be a fairly gradual creep and not a giant step forward. Both to ease new players in and to not abandon players who have heavily invested in the game by making their investment worthless.
I also understand that its fun to spoil the better cards to get people hyped. But Ben Brode has said that all cards will be spoiled before launch. Which means that at some point there needs to be a lull in the consistency of the cards if the power creep is to be reasonable at all. If these are the cards we are getting during the lull (which is what I assume since it would make sense to have the most hype when the set is announced and when it is on the verge of coming out and we aren't at either of those atm) then the power creep is going to be pretty extreme.
The power creep is an issue with the normal cards for me more than the Legendaries. I always thought it was kind of dumb that there are a whole batch of Legendaries that people consider horrible cards; it always seemed to me all the big bads should be extremely powerful. People get frustrated when they luck into a good pack and the big yellow burst when the card turns over yields a horrible dud (Millhouse, I'm looking at you). The big guys are more visible targets for criticism, but as zoo decks have been demonstrating repeatedly, the most common problem comes from very well utilized and slightly overpowered hordes of uncommons and rares. Most games I lose are not to King Kong, but usually more to a swarm of tiny rhesus monkeys, if you take my meaning.
Hmm, I never gave it whole bunches of thought, but I can see how power creep would occur. My first thought in re: new people is that it would be silly if they cut their own throat by diminishing the influx of new people. After all, every game needs a certain popularity.
I think that many, many people come in through checking out the F2P route. So, Blizzard would have to change something about that introductory route. Either simply drop the whole F2P umbrella, or rework the tutorial so that some "basic" type cards from the new set are included. You don't want to make the jump too huge between what you experience in the tutorial and what you experience in "real" play.
There needs to be an occasional bite of carrot amongst the beating sticks to keep people coming back.
Maybe they could just add another sort of layer on top of the existing tutorial that deals more with the GvG stuff.
PS... It sounds more & more like there will be a period of fairly confusing instability in all areas when the new cards are released. I've been thinking that I'll just sort of spectate until things settle down again.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
we are not amused....
(nothing upsets a delicate situation like a large explosion...)
Power creep is inevitable in TCGs unfortunately. This has always been the case. If new cards are weaker/on equal power level with older cards then people have less of an incentive to buy/play the new cards.
I think the general concern is more about the rate at which power creep seems to be occurring. People feel as if its too much for the first expansion.
While this is a concern I think we should wait for the full spoiler before making any judgements.
The main problem is alot of decks weren't viable simply because there weren't sufficient cards for that type of deck.
As new cards come out, combo's and card interaction becomes stronger, so power creep is inevitable.
Power creep is not about combos or interactions, it is about 1 lone card being completely and unarguably superior in every way to an existing card. (Dr Boom vs War Golem)
The main problem is alot of decks weren't viable simply because there weren't sufficient cards for that type of deck.
As new cards come out, combo's and card interaction becomes stronger, so power creep is inevitable.
Power creep is not about combos or interactions, it is about 1 lone card being completely and unarguably superior in every way to an existing card. (Dr Boom vs War Golem)
War Golem is a basic card, not a legendary expert set card...
I haven't noticed significant power creep, so far this set has been the "Falling Empires" of Hearthstone to me. If you're worried about "Godzilla," it's the first legendary spoiled that doesn't suck and it's only for Hunters and likely only for Webspinner in most deck lists ...
The main problem is alot of decks weren't viable simply because there weren't sufficient cards for that type of deck.
As new cards come out, combo's and card interaction becomes stronger, so power creep is inevitable.
Power creep is not about combos or interactions, it is about 1 lone card being completely and unarguably superior in every way to an existing card. (Dr Boom vs War Golem)
War Golem is a basic card, not a legendary expert set card...
Card rarity does not effect value. Legendaries are held to the exact same standard as commons.
It's not that all the new cards are superduperOP, it's that most of the basic set is complete junk. I'm looking at you Silverback Patriarch. No banana for you.
It's also surprising how the new rare and epics are pretty good so far, unlike the old ones that were insanely situational or just downright pathetic ( how many Bloodsail Corsair have i dusted? too many).
The main problem is alot of decks weren't viable simply because there weren't sufficient cards for that type of deck.
As new cards come out, combo's and card interaction becomes stronger, so power creep is inevitable.
Power creep is not about combos or interactions, it is about 1 lone card being completely and unarguably superior in every way to an existing card. (Dr Boom vs War Golem)
War Golem is a basic card, not a legendary expert set card...
Card rarity does not effect value. Legendaries are held to the exact same standard as commons.
IMO it does make a difference. If there would be now a basic card which would have 7/8 vanilla stats for 7 mana it would make the basic War Golem obsolete. I think you can not compare cards from different rarirites with each other. In the case of Dr. Boom i see no difference to Prophet Velen, who is a 7/7 for 7 mana as well. Both are legendaries, you expect them to stand out, this or that way.
Tbh, all the talk about power creeping is pretty annoying. In most cases people do not understand what power creeping even means. In other cases it creates much more fear than it should.
Some cards are so bad (War Golem, Silverback Patriarch) I don't care that they are power creeped. It's not like they power creeped Yeti, but cards that were never played or had any potential anyway. The biggest outright power creep was Dark Cultist during Naxx (which I still hate), but I don't really see any GvG card on that level. A lot of the good cards are solely for Mech archetypes, which can't replace cards outside of Mech decks.
But Hearthstone has been out so long without releasing many new cards. Been playing since Beta, and in about a year they only released 30 cards (though there were balance changes). Right now, I'd rather have ~100 useful cards that will change the game than have them be conservative and end up with only 10 useful cards and 110 cards that will never see daylight (But it also depends on how fast Blizzard release cards, which doesn't actually seem very fast).
Something to keep in mind also is that once all the new cards have been released, and the masses find the game breaking combinations/builds, Blizzard will do further balancing. So after the first couple months, some of these cards will be changed. Don't over worry yourself and others at this point in time.
I do have similar worries that with all these new aggro cards, (and lack of control cards) that the meta will drift further towards Zoo/Aggro decks. Control is by far my favorite. But there is still 2/3s of the GvG set left to be seen. At this point were starting to have a clearer view of what the new META brings, but not enough for the current level of worry.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
All men dream, but not equally. Those who dream by night in the dusty recesses of their minds, wake in the day to find that it was vanity: but the dreamers of the day are dangerous men, for they may act on their dreams with open eyes, to make them possible. - T. E. Lawrence
It's as well done as analysis of Power creeping in the new expansion goes and i actually agree with most of what the guy said. There is basically no Power creeping going on at all at least not among the cards we've seen so far. We obviously don't know whats left to come and there might be some blatant cases but so far Blizz has done a good job.
I'm sorry to be so blunt but i don't think he or you understand power creep. He at one point says something akin to I don't think its power creep, we just need to reevaluate what we expect out of a 3 drop. That is exactly what I define as power creep. When we start changing the math to evaluate cards then power creep is occuring. Strict one to one comparisons is a very narrow way to evaluate power creep and misses a lot. I'm willing to bet that if you examined, on a set by set basis, the games that people talk about having terrible power creep (Pokemon, YuGiOh, etc) then you wouldn't see much power creep at all there either.
GvG may not have a lot cards that are strictly better than any other exactly comparable cards but that does not mean that the power creep isn't there. And imo it doesn't even mean that it is in acceptable amounts.
Maybe others disagree but I'm not a fan of ever increasing metas that solely revolve around the latest set. I'm just hoping that the post GvG meta won't be as GvG-centric as the post Naxx meta was Naxx-centric. I'm hoping it will feel more like an add-on then the only way to survive.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Anybody else starting to get worried about the amount of power creep in GvG?
The first round of card releases I thought, yeah these are good but not standout. They seem to be fun options but they aren't consistently better than our current options. But that doesn't seem to be the case anymore. It feels like each card that is released is on par with the best cards currently in the game.
I'm seriously starting to worry that it will become quickly apparent that without GvG cards, you simply won't compete on the ladder.
This is only half the set we're seeing. Spoilers are more fun when you show off the more powerful/interesting cards. Chances are the other half of the set isn't as powerful.
Power creep is inevitable in TCGs unfortunately. This has always been the case. If new cards are weaker/on equal power level with older cards then people have less of an incentive to buy/play the new cards.
I don't agree. Yes Gaz is crazy because it's health pool is so high that it requires premium removal, otherwise it trades for 2-4 minions or does crazy damage to the face. However, as a warrior that just means that in the hunter matchup I'll save an execute for it. Currently the best thing to execute are the Svannah's or some smaller minion if I get a really slow start, so it's not that big of a deal.
Hunters may start running more Tundra Rhino which will hurt a lot, especially if they can combo that with a wild pyro or elven archer
Basically this is the reason. Also there are plenty of strong cards in the classic set, but there has to be a reason to play new cards.
I think the general concern is more about the rate at which power creep seems to be occurring. People feel as if its too much for the first expansion.
TBH, I hadn't even seen Gahz yet when I posted this. I think he is okay. I think all the legendaries they've previewed are fine. Legendaries should be powerful. They don't seem imbalanced at all. IMO
And I understand that there needs to be some power creep but if it is too drastic then this game will very quickly become unplayable to newer players. It should be a fairly gradual creep and not a giant step forward. Both to ease new players in and to not abandon players who have heavily invested in the game by making their investment worthless.
I also understand that its fun to spoil the better cards to get people hyped. But Ben Brode has said that all cards will be spoiled before launch. Which means that at some point there needs to be a lull in the consistency of the cards if the power creep is to be reasonable at all. If these are the cards we are getting during the lull (which is what I assume since it would make sense to have the most hype when the set is announced and when it is on the verge of coming out and we aren't at either of those atm) then the power creep is going to be pretty extreme.
The power creep is an issue with the normal cards for me more than the Legendaries. I always thought it was kind of dumb that there are a whole batch of Legendaries that people consider horrible cards; it always seemed to me all the big bads should be extremely powerful. People get frustrated when they luck into a good pack and the big yellow burst when the card turns over yields a horrible dud (Millhouse, I'm looking at you). The big guys are more visible targets for criticism, but as zoo decks have been demonstrating repeatedly, the most common problem comes from very well utilized and slightly overpowered hordes of uncommons and rares. Most games I lose are not to King Kong, but usually more to a swarm of tiny rhesus monkeys, if you take my meaning.
Hmm, I never gave it whole bunches of thought, but I can see how power creep would occur. My first thought in re: new people is that it would be silly if they cut their own throat by diminishing the influx of new people. After all, every game needs a certain popularity.
I think that many, many people come in through checking out the F2P route. So, Blizzard would have to change something about that introductory route. Either simply drop the whole F2P umbrella, or rework the tutorial so that some "basic" type cards from the new set are included. You don't want to make the jump too huge between what you experience in the tutorial and what you experience in "real" play.
There needs to be an occasional bite of carrot amongst the beating sticks to keep people coming back.
Maybe they could just add another sort of layer on top of the existing tutorial that deals more with the GvG stuff.
PS... It sounds more & more like there will be a period of fairly confusing instability in all areas when the new cards are released. I've been thinking that I'll just sort of spectate until things settle down again.
we are not amused....
(nothing upsets a delicate situation like a large explosion...)
While this is a concern I think we should wait for the full spoiler before making any judgements.
Power creep is not about combos or interactions, it is about 1 lone card being completely and unarguably superior in every way to an existing card. (Dr Boom vs War Golem)
War Golem is a basic card, not a legendary expert set card...
I haven't noticed significant power creep, so far this set has been the "Falling Empires" of Hearthstone to me. If you're worried about "Godzilla," it's the first legendary spoiled that doesn't suck and it's only for Hunters and likely only for Webspinner in most deck lists ...
Card rarity does not effect value. Legendaries are held to the exact same standard as commons.
It's not that all the new cards are superduperOP, it's that most of the basic set is complete junk. I'm looking at you Silverback Patriarch. No banana for you.
It's also surprising how the new rare and epics are pretty good so far, unlike the old ones that were insanely situational or just downright pathetic ( how many Bloodsail Corsair have i dusted? too many).
My comments refer mostly to the wild format.
IMO it does make a difference. If there would be now a basic card which would have 7/8 vanilla stats for 7 mana it would make the basic War Golem obsolete. I think you can not compare cards from different rarirites with each other. In the case of Dr. Boom i see no difference to Prophet Velen, who is a 7/7 for 7 mana as well. Both are legendaries, you expect them to stand out, this or that way.
Tbh, all the talk about power creeping is pretty annoying. In most cases people do not understand what power creeping even means. In other cases it creates much more fear than it should.
Some cards are so bad (War Golem, Silverback Patriarch) I don't care that they are power creeped. It's not like they power creeped Yeti, but cards that were never played or had any potential anyway. The biggest outright power creep was Dark Cultist during Naxx (which I still hate), but I don't really see any GvG card on that level. A lot of the good cards are solely for Mech archetypes, which can't replace cards outside of Mech decks.
But Hearthstone has been out so long without releasing many new cards. Been playing since Beta, and in about a year they only released 30 cards (though there were balance changes). Right now, I'd rather have ~100 useful cards that will change the game than have them be conservative and end up with only 10 useful cards and 110 cards that will never see daylight (But it also depends on how fast Blizzard release cards, which doesn't actually seem very fast).
Something to keep in mind also is that once all the new cards have been released, and the masses find the game breaking combinations/builds, Blizzard will do further balancing. So after the first couple months, some of these cards will be changed. Don't over worry yourself and others at this point in time.
I do have similar worries that with all these new aggro cards, (and lack of control cards) that the meta will drift further towards Zoo/Aggro decks. Control is by far my favorite. But there is still 2/3s of the GvG set left to be seen. At this point were starting to have a clearer view of what the new META brings, but not enough for the current level of worry.
All men dream, but not equally. Those who dream by night in the dusty recesses of their minds, wake in the day to find that it was vanity: but the dreamers of the day are dangerous men, for they may act on their dreams with open eyes, to make them possible. - T. E. Lawrence
Totally true: Pint-size vs Mech Warper, Dust Devil vs Zap-o_Mat
I'm sorry to be so blunt but i don't think he or you understand power creep. He at one point says something akin to I don't think its power creep, we just need to reevaluate what we expect out of a 3 drop. That is exactly what I define as power creep. When we start changing the math to evaluate cards then power creep is occuring. Strict one to one comparisons is a very narrow way to evaluate power creep and misses a lot. I'm willing to bet that if you examined, on a set by set basis, the games that people talk about having terrible power creep (Pokemon, YuGiOh, etc) then you wouldn't see much power creep at all there either.
GvG may not have a lot cards that are strictly better than any other exactly comparable cards but that does not mean that the power creep isn't there. And imo it doesn't even mean that it is in acceptable amounts.
Maybe others disagree but I'm not a fan of ever increasing metas that solely revolve around the latest set. I'm just hoping that the post GvG meta won't be as GvG-centric as the post Naxx meta was Naxx-centric. I'm hoping it will feel more like an add-on then the only way to survive.