Hearthpwn

In the past few months I've played enough wild to say that the games usually end by turn 7 - turn 8. The card pool is big enough now to finish games in those turns with all heroes.

Despite this, Druid is the only class with actual ramp strategies, so this makes me feel that every high-cost card from neutral collection printed at every new expansion is actually a druid support in around...80% of times.

I tried to play Travelmaster Dungar and 4 games in a row the game ended in turns 6, 7 or 8. I didn't even get the chance to play the card. So this made me quit the game. I didn't feel like playing anymore.

I see this as an actual problem Hearthstone is starting to have.

What do you guys feel?

Games are over too fast I do agree. You can only do so much though. This is the current state of the game. You can't do stuff like that unless you sacrafice half your deck for control to even get a chance to play bigger cards. I only do ladder for quests and such. I play BG Duos I don't see the point anymore. Meta is way too aggressive.

Dungar represents the worst elements of the recruit keyword design.

its too expensive to be timely, its too broadly worded to be consistent, and the card pool, by-in-large, is too limited to be impactful.

Quote from b1ak1ce >>

Dungar represents the worst elements of the recruit keyword design.

its too expensive to be timely, its too broadly worded to be consistent, and the card pool, by-in-large, is too limited to be impactful.

You are missing the point.

exactly, control is dying. They only fix/equal the winning % on high ranks. Instead it would feel much better if every deck style would have a chance. Say, you take longer so you need better surviveability. The rush concept got too much support that even if you clear their decks, they can easily refill and burst, - I mean I want the 40 or 35 HP back..

Also stop creating unfair cards like the Warrior bombs or WL sinfony. Sure if it would blow up 1-2 cards its ok with me. But taking away 6 cards is just insane.. and it happens way too often.

Aggresive decks are to strong in wild mode. Luckily, most people just want to play Renathal/Reno decks. In those contol vs control matchups Hearthstone still shines like it did in the good old days. In these games there is also room for lategame cards. Travelmaster Dungar is not the best example imho, since it's a weak payoff and in addition it needs some deck building around it. But there are at least some viable 8+ Mana cards in the meta. For example:

Lightforged Cariel

Aviana

Shudderwock

Reno, Lone Ranger

Quote from Sonnix >>

Aggresive decks are to strong in wild mode. Luckily, most people just want to play Renathal/Reno decks. In those contol vs control matchups Hearthstone still shines like it did in the good old days. In these games there is also room for lategame cards. Travelmaster Dungar is not the best example imho, since it's a weak payoff and in addition it needs some deck building around it. But there are at least some viable 8+ Mana cards in the meta. For example:

Lightforged Cariel

Aviana

Shudderwock

Reno, Lone Ranger

 you too are missing the point...

If everybody gets your point wrong, you may consider the possibility of actually being wrong.

Personally I feel the game has several major flaws.

1) it's too fast.  Several classes have access to very overpowered early game strategies either because these strategies require a synergy with other cards (e.g. pirates) or have a "downside" e.g. pain-lock.  Problem is, both of these constraints end up being strong benefits.

2) it's too consistent with too much cheap card draw, generation and tutoring.  Decks can flood the board turn after turn and never run out of resouces.  You don't really have to decide whether to over-commit to the board, because you can just to it all again next turn.  Alternatively - I want to draw unkilliax in warrior - here's 4 cards that can do exactly that.  The consistency means that games play out exactly the same every single time.

3) too much mana cheat - It's always been problematic when it works well, and it's really un-fun to play against.  I'm not against the concept, they just take it too far every time.

So yeah - in summary I think it's generally too fast.

I do think it's worth considering why though.  Blizz seems intent on creating decks which kill you on turn 5/6/7, either through OTK/combo or decks like big mage.  Often the only way to beat these decks is to "kill them before..." hence the requirement for aggro to be able to do it's thing  earlier.  In a "balanced" game control would shine at stopping aggro but lose to the OTK/combo decks, but in the current itteration of hearthstone control often struggles against aggro either because board clears haven't kept up with minion health or, as is the case in pirate DH, all the minions end up with charge and get to do their damage before you can clear them.

If you play control as your main style of deck you're going to struggle in modern hearthstone.  There are too many OTK's, aggro is too fast and gimmic decks like BSM are too oppressive.  Note that I'm not saying any of these decks are unbeatable, just that I don't think control style decks end up being viable for a lot of match-ups.

Still agree to pretty much all he said.. 7 years ago.

I unironically think they intend to keep the game braindead because it caters to more players that way. Plus the definition of fun for most people is just to beat their opponent and feel good about themselves, so they just copy paste net decks and play the game like a calculator.

Aggro got too powerful with all the early synergies, tools to draw/refill, they never run out of cards before they kill you especially in wild. Maybe cheap minions shouldn't powercreep anymore, but I know this will never happen.

I don't know where you got an idea that Hearthstone was slower in the good old days. Did you guys use to play Control Warrior mirrors all the time?

The game was designed to be over by turn 7-8 on average. The goal (in general) for aggro was to kill the opponent by turn 5-6, for midrange and combo it was turn 7-9, for control it was to survive until turn 10.

Not only is Hearthstone not getting faster, it's become significantly slower to the point the decks that would be midrange at the time now are considered aggro and people are complaining about the games that are over when it was intended as way too fast. Just look at the mechanics: charge was mostly reduced to the finishers, taunt is a free bonus now, rush and lifesteal that were not there are all over the place now.

Quote from Sonnix >>

Aviana

 

 Aviana is probably the worst example you could've given, lmao.

She's either cheated out easily for 1 mana with Puppetmaster Dorian and Juicy Psychmelon, or played on turn 3/4 due to Druid's ramp.

Quote from Sonnix >>

If everybody gets your point wrong, you may consider the possibility of actually being wrong.

 Not everybody. Just 2 of you.

I am not talking about the viability of high-cost cards, or what high-cost cards are more valuable.

I am talking about the availability of high-cost cards for classes except druid.

all high-cost cards in neutral collection offer druid more support than to other classes.

Have you tried Standard? Everyone seems to forget the game is designed with standard in mind. A lot of people complaining about hyper short games play wild. Why? Standard will always be lower in power level.

Quote from Andrei2007 >>

Have you tried Standard? Everyone seems to forget the game is designed with standard in mind. A lot of people complaining about hyper short games play wild. Why? Standard will always be lower in power level.

 That doesn't solve the issue. Just by me playing standard doesn't solve the fact that druid gets more support from high-cost neutrals than other classes. Do you even get what I am trying to say here?

Quote from Raan_Dohm_Schitt >>

Quote from b1ak1ce >>

Dungar represents the worst elements of the recruit keyword design.

its too expensive to be timely, its too broadly worded to be consistent, and the card pool, by-in-large, is too limited to be impactful.

You are missing the point.

Which is what exactly? The game is too fast so I can't play 7+ cards in any class but Druid? 

Quote from lv426a11 >>

Personally I feel the game has several major flaws.

1) it's too fast.  Several classes have access to very overpowered early game strategies either because these strategies require a synergy with other cards (e.g. pirates) or have a "downside" e.g. pain-lock.  Problem is, both of these constraints end up being strong benefits.

2) it's too consistent with too much cheap card draw, generation and tutoring.  Decks can flood the board turn after turn and never run out of resouces.  You don't really have to decide whether to over-commit to the board, because you can just to it all again next turn.  Alternatively - I want to draw unkilliax in warrior - here's 4 cards that can do exactly that.  The consistency means that games play out exactly the same every single time.

3) too much mana cheat - It's always been problematic when it works well, and it's really un-fun to play against.  I'm not against the concept, they just take it too far every time.

So yeah - in summary I think it's generally too fast.

I do think it's worth considering why though.  Blizz seems intent on creating decks which kill you on turn 5/6/7, either through OTK/combo or decks like big mage.  Often the only way to beat these decks is to "kill them before..." hence the requirement for aggro to be able to do it's thing  earlier.  In a "balanced" game control would shine at stopping aggro but lose to the OTK/combo decks, but in the current itteration of hearthstone control often struggles against aggro either because board clears haven't kept up with minion health or, as is the case in pirate DH, all the minions end up with charge and get to do their damage before you can clear them.

If you play control as your main style of deck you're going to struggle in modern hearthstone.  There are too many OTK's, aggro is too fast and gimmic decks like BSM are too oppressive.  Note that I'm not saying any of these decks are unbeatable, just that I don't think control style decks end up being viable for a lot of match-ups.

 Real good post here and I concur.  I do enjoy some control and longer games but it CAN be too much.  Lets be honest here - while the game is too fast and aggro can just re-vomit turn after turn, we also dont really enjoy games where Warrior just armors up, removes everything for 8 turns and then drops Brann/Boomboss on you.  That kind of sucks too.

Thius is why, IMO, the midrange style decks offer the best mix of game play.  You do get to play some higher cost cards.  Decisions on removal, board/face, etc. do matter.  Games arent over so fats but they dont drag on either.  I dunno.  hardcore control has its downsides.

Plot twist, dungar was a druid card all along and is actually blowing people out of the game right now in standard. Ramp ramp ramp > dungar > I win.