You are salty because you lost. I get it. I am salty because there used to be really good conversations inside these forums. Coversations that helped all of us learn how to win without nerfing everything. Nowadays, mostly nerfing threads. I am sure there are good ones still, but burried under layers and layers of anti tickatus-springwater-ohhmyyogg-whatever I can´t win against threads.
I am sure this is not the most popular line of thinking, but that does not mean it is absolutly wrong.
You're right. The dialogue here should be, "how do we beat this?" not "I can't win against this, so it's impossible".
Sometimes a complaint is warranted and if a specific card or deck is being used way too much, then obviously something is wrong, but this meta feels fine.
I can somewhat tell if something is OP or not by watching streamers play. I don't call cards OP because I'm salty and I acknowledge playing OP cards as well myself.
I can somewhat tell if something is OP or not by watching streamers play. I don't call cards OP because I'm salty and I acknowledge playing OP cards as well myself.
There are no OP cards though, a few bad cards yes but none of the current cards stand out is particularly strong. These are all negative QQ threads that this post is pointing out. Street fighter 2 and star craft don't need patches, people know how to make adjustments and adapt to the game to win without the need for patches. This game doesn't need arbitrary patches either. It's bad enough the paladin sword and deck of lunacy got nerfed merely weeks out of the gate. People have a learn to play issue and a complaining issue currently in this game.
You're right. The dialogue here should be, "how do we beat this?" not "I can't win against this, so it's impossible".
Sometimes a complaint is warranted and if a specific card or deck is being used way too much, then obviously something is wrong, but this meta feels fine.
Just because a deck is popular doesn't mean it needs to be nerfed. The counter might just not be discovered yet or people haven't tried to find new strategies, its punishing the player base for playing a popular deck. There are no specific cards that need nerfing the game is fine as is. There are no warranted complaints here.
yes, i need to learn how to not have hysteria wipe my entire board before it touches opponents minions, or how to have the 4th devolving missiles of the game not completely wreck me so my opponent who drew his entire deck for basically 0 mana gets a free win. some cards are inherently too powerful. crabrider is one of them and I use him in all my decks.
nobody care about your mind being changed or not u supadumb 4 dat... game is unbalanced super super super unbalanced right now and it all comes from their attempt at creating "class themes" super forced like no spell mage super forced, sercret paladin super forced every class that does not have a super forced deck is basically bad and that is why shaman is so low
I don't mind the buffs and the nerfs but for a different reason: they shake up the meta, change it up a bit and for a few days things feel fresh again. Ideally, this would be achieved in other ways e.g. more frequent new card releases and I think they are also heading that way with the mini-sets.
As it is, the game is simple enough that asking: 'how do I beat this particular deck/counter a strategy' only gets you so far. You only have so many viable cards at you disposal and you need to think about your own win condition and enjoyment as well. 30 cards is often not enough to tick all of those boxes so you either trade counter/win condition/enjoyment or call for nerfs to at least preserve the latter two. Ideally, your counter would become part of your win condition, but that is rarely the case (is anyone running Horde Operative? - no).
Your way of thinking is constructive and I like it. Agreed that we should be thinking in these terms. But once meta gets figured out, which happens pretty quickly, players know that there's only so much that can be done. And things get stale.
There is nothing wrong with nerfing or buffing cards. It changes the meta and thats good for the game. People stop playing when all they queue in to is the same decks. If you want the best for the game then you should be welcoming as many shake ups in the meta as possible.
I agree with the above. Plus there's always statistics, and if tier 1 consists of 3 paladin decks and face hunter than we have a problem. It's not L2P issue, it's queuing into the same deck most of the time. Nerfs (and buffs) help shake things up and discover new decks that otherwise would be inferior to Paladin.
Also, I will leave this small sample size here: I played 12 games last night at diamond 5 - 12 paladin players, 7 of them coined crab raider turn 1.
Blizzard has an army of defenders on fora like these. You seem to be one of them. So you don't care what kind of next red meat they throw at you and only think to converse how to work around it.
Let me educate you how it works. Blizzard purposefully print unbalanced OP cards just to stimulate complain threads. Good or bad, it stirs up conversation and creates involvement. It's part of their marketing strategy and businessmodel. If you are not talked about you are irrelevant kind of business psychology. Capisce?
Maybe the conversation should evolve around convincing Blizzard to print more balanced cards in the first place.. I'm sure the amount of complain threads would deminish rapidly.
But according to you Blizzard isn't te problem, whiners are, Is it.....fanboy?
There is nothing wrong with nerfing or buffing cards. It changes the meta and thats good for the game. People stop playing when all they queue in to is the same decks. If you want the best for the game then you should be welcoming as many shake ups in the meta as possible.
To add to this - if people are only ever queing into the same decks (usually the best deck + the best counter deck), that suggests that the meta is not balanced. Ideallistically there should always (imo) be room for multiple competitive decks from different classes and different viable strategies (aggro, control, midrange etc.) and anything less than this suggests a problem with the meta.
There are clearly some cards that should be changed. Some are objectively OP in isolation e.g. Crabrider ,some are OP in the context of the deck they're used in Refreshing Spring Water and some just suck the fun out of the game Tickatus for certain decks/classes.
Well I think most of us can agree, that some hypothetical card nerfs have been very overrepresented on this site (No need to mention his name).
Luckily Team 5 doesn't use hearthpwn as their monitoring tool for balance changes, but actual data. None of us have convinced the team into a 2nd round of nerfs. Sword of the fallen was pretty objectively overpowered along with Jandice and far watch post. While people here "whining" about that, were pretty much stating the obvious, Team 5 did what we all knew had to be done.
While I think many of these cards have been purposely made very strong, with a "we can always nerf it" attitude, I don't think it's a very deep, wicked business scheme. If you take expansions like Rastakhan's rumble and TGT, that had pretty low power level and generally sucked, the HS team now seem a lot more scared of making underpowered expansions. They also tried to make secret paladin and no minion mage the "new" interesting decks to play, but you have to admit that they overdid it and that the numbers are still a bit high.
About the most complained card. It is not the stats and performance that is the problem. It is how it influence the meta that's important. And that makes it a political card - that is its purpose.
But fanboy and pseudo-intellectual alike only look at stats and performance. And then again:
The politics of politics is that one assumes that there is no politics involved. And that's very political. The masess complain through different channels. Pwn is just one of them.
They won't nerf it. It serves its purpose very well.
My issue with the game is that I'd like it to be something that it isn't, and I have to accept it and move on. I enjoy situations where both players have several tools (cards) and options, there's some strategy, and you gotta make decisions to solve "the puzzle" (puzzle being the match or turn), being smarter than the other player, or get outsmarted and lose. So I personally enjoy a more control oriented meta, with slower games and more decision making about when and where to spend your resources, baiting your opponent, etc. and not this autopilot matches where one player begins to snowball and the other gets this particular card that denies enemy's plan or just lose (at least that's my impression about these last years' meta). HS has never been too complex, but at least I remember some (old) times where there were some decks that required some thinking/maths/whatever, and even if they were really/too strong, at the same time they were somehow A BIT demanding for the player.
Nowadays, with this autopilot meta, people have gotten much more lazy, so now the trend is this turbo-netdecking and "nerf this, nerf that", cause we want it all chewed up (but it's not only with this game, lol). As said, in my opinion it's just a matter of accepting the trend has gone this way, so the minority (where I include myself) has to "try to enjoy" this ecosystem or move on to another game/hobby/more important thing to do than HS.
My issue with the game is that I'd like it to be something that it isn't, and I have to accept it and move on. I enjoy situations where both players have several tools (cards) and options, there's some strategy, and you gotta make decisions to solve "the puzzle" (puzzle being the match or turn), being smarter than the other player, or get outsmarted and lose. So I personally enjoy a more control oriented meta, with slower games and more decision making about when and where to spend your resources, baiting your opponent, etc. and not this autopilot matches where one player begins to snowball and the other gets this particular card that denies enemy's plan or just lose (at least that's my impression about these last years' meta). HS has never been too complex, but at least I remember some (old) times where there were some decks that required some thinking/maths/whatever, and even if they were really/too strong, at the same time they were somehow A BIT demanding for the player.
Nowadays, with this autopilot meta, people have gotten much more lazy, so now the trend is this turbo-netdecking and "nerf this, nerf that", cause we want it all chewed up (but it's not only with this game, lol). As said, in my opinion it's just a matter of accepting the trend has gone this way, so the minority (where I include myself) has to "try to enjoy" this ecosystem or move on to another game/hobby/more important thing to do than HS.
Just my two cents, have a nice day.
Well spoken. You seem to be a pragmatic idealist as I once was. Warped into a Game Justice Warrior.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
We make our world significant through the courage of our questions and the depth of our answers.
You are salty because you lost. I get it. I am salty because there used to be really good conversations inside these forums. Coversations that helped all of us learn how to win without nerfing everything. Nowadays, mostly nerfing threads. I am sure there are good ones still, but burried under layers and layers of anti tickatus-springwater-ohhmyyogg-whatever I can´t win against threads.
I am sure this is not the most popular line of thinking, but that does not mean it is absolutly wrong.
Go ahead, change my mind.
What exactly should I learn from a situation where my opponent is using coin to get an early flow or crabrider? I'm seriously curious, please do share.
They need to nerf more because they know that the cards they are printing are to strong, and they don't vare because strong cards means more People buying packs.
I thought about this concept as I was losing the vast majority of my games yesterday afternoon while using an alleged “high legend” control priest deck. Since this exact deck was being used by another player in the top ranks of standard, it had to be my fault i was losing by piloting it incorrectly. However, whenever I played against a Warlock i felt it was legitimately a hopeless cause as Tickatus would mill me into fatigue and 6/6 Infernals were being pumped out every turn. Even now it amazes me how someone could win in those match-ups even 40% to 50% of the time. So although i despise Tickatus as a card I know other people out there are actually seeing success with the deck I’m using, which makes me want to learn what their secret is more than wanting to kill the card outright.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
You are salty because you lost. I get it. I am salty because there used to be really good conversations inside these forums. Coversations that helped all of us learn how to win without nerfing everything. Nowadays, mostly nerfing threads. I am sure there are good ones still, but burried under layers and layers of anti tickatus-springwater-ohhmyyogg-whatever I can´t win against threads.
I am sure this is not the most popular line of thinking, but that does not mean it is absolutly wrong.
Go ahead, change my mind.
No... I don't think I will.
You're right. The dialogue here should be, "how do we beat this?" not "I can't win against this, so it's impossible".
Sometimes a complaint is warranted and if a specific card or deck is being used way too much, then obviously something is wrong, but this meta feels fine.
I can somewhat tell if something is OP or not by watching streamers play. I don't call cards OP because I'm salty and I acknowledge playing OP cards as well myself.
There are no OP cards though, a few bad cards yes but none of the current cards stand out is particularly strong. These are all negative QQ threads that this post is pointing out. Street fighter 2 and star craft don't need patches, people know how to make adjustments and adapt to the game to win without the need for patches. This game doesn't need arbitrary patches either. It's bad enough the paladin sword and deck of lunacy got nerfed merely weeks out of the gate. People have a learn to play issue and a complaining issue currently in this game.
Just because a deck is popular doesn't mean it needs to be nerfed. The counter might just not be discovered yet or people haven't tried to find new strategies, its punishing the player base for playing a popular deck. There are no specific cards that need nerfing the game is fine as is. There are no warranted complaints here.
yes, i need to learn how to not have hysteria wipe my entire board before it touches opponents minions, or how to have the 4th devolving missiles of the game not completely wreck me so my opponent who drew his entire deck for basically 0 mana gets a free win. some cards are inherently too powerful. crabrider is one of them and I use him in all my decks.
Can't tell if this is a coordinated troll thread designed just to trigger people...
nobody care about your mind being changed or not u supadumb 4 dat... game is unbalanced super super super unbalanced right now and it all comes from their attempt at creating "class themes" super forced like no spell mage super forced, sercret paladin super forced every class that does not have a super forced deck is basically bad and that is why shaman is so low
change my mind lol
I don't mind the buffs and the nerfs but for a different reason: they shake up the meta, change it up a bit and for a few days things feel fresh again. Ideally, this would be achieved in other ways e.g. more frequent new card releases and I think they are also heading that way with the mini-sets.
As it is, the game is simple enough that asking: 'how do I beat this particular deck/counter a strategy' only gets you so far. You only have so many viable cards at you disposal and you need to think about your own win condition and enjoyment as well. 30 cards is often not enough to tick all of those boxes so you either trade counter/win condition/enjoyment or call for nerfs to at least preserve the latter two. Ideally, your counter would become part of your win condition, but that is rarely the case (is anyone running Horde Operative? - no).
Your way of thinking is constructive and I like it. Agreed that we should be thinking in these terms. But once meta gets figured out, which happens pretty quickly, players know that there's only so much that can be done. And things get stale.
There is nothing wrong with nerfing or buffing cards. It changes the meta and thats good for the game. People stop playing when all they queue in to is the same decks. If you want the best for the game then you should be welcoming as many shake ups in the meta as possible.
I agree with the above. Plus there's always statistics, and if tier 1 consists of 3 paladin decks and face hunter than we have a problem. It's not L2P issue, it's queuing into the same deck most of the time. Nerfs (and buffs) help shake things up and discover new decks that otherwise would be inferior to Paladin.
Also, I will leave this small sample size here: I played 12 games last night at diamond 5 - 12 paladin players, 7 of them coined crab raider turn 1.
Blizzard has an army of defenders on fora like these. You seem to be one of them. So you don't care what kind of next red meat they throw at you and only think to converse how to work around it.
Let me educate you how it works. Blizzard purposefully print unbalanced OP cards just to stimulate complain threads. Good or bad, it stirs up conversation and creates involvement. It's part of their marketing strategy and businessmodel. If you are not talked about you are irrelevant kind of business psychology. Capisce?
Maybe the conversation should evolve around convincing Blizzard to print more balanced cards in the first place.. I'm sure the amount of complain threads would deminish rapidly.
But according to you Blizzard isn't te problem, whiners are, Is it.....fanboy?
We make our world significant through the courage of our questions and the depth of our answers.
To add to this - if people are only ever queing into the same decks (usually the best deck + the best counter deck), that suggests that the meta is not balanced. Ideallistically there should always (imo) be room for multiple competitive decks from different classes and different viable strategies (aggro, control, midrange etc.) and anything less than this suggests a problem with the meta.
There are clearly some cards that should be changed. Some are objectively OP in isolation e.g. Crabrider ,some are OP in the context of the deck they're used in Refreshing Spring Water and some just suck the fun out of the game Tickatus for certain decks/classes.
(that should be nerfed
Well I think most of us can agree, that some hypothetical card nerfs have been very overrepresented on this site (No need to mention his name).
Luckily Team 5 doesn't use hearthpwn as their monitoring tool for balance changes, but actual data. None of us have convinced the team into a 2nd round of nerfs. Sword of the fallen was pretty objectively overpowered along with Jandice and far watch post. While people here "whining" about that, were pretty much stating the obvious, Team 5 did what we all knew had to be done.
While I think many of these cards have been purposely made very strong, with a "we can always nerf it" attitude, I don't think it's a very deep, wicked business scheme. If you take expansions like Rastakhan's rumble and TGT, that had pretty low power level and generally sucked, the HS team now seem a lot more scared of making underpowered expansions. They also tried to make secret paladin and no minion mage the "new" interesting decks to play, but you have to admit that they overdid it and that the numbers are still a bit high.
About the most complained card. It is not the stats and performance that is the problem. It is how it influence the meta that's important. And that makes it a political card - that is its purpose.
But fanboy and pseudo-intellectual alike only look at stats and performance. And then again:
The politics of politics is that one assumes that there is no politics involved. And that's very political. The masess complain through different channels. Pwn is just one of them.
They won't nerf it. It serves its purpose very well.
We make our world significant through the courage of our questions and the depth of our answers.
My issue with the game is that I'd like it to be something that it isn't, and I have to accept it and move on. I enjoy situations where both players have several tools (cards) and options, there's some strategy, and you gotta make decisions to solve "the puzzle" (puzzle being the match or turn), being smarter than the other player, or get outsmarted and lose. So I personally enjoy a more control oriented meta, with slower games and more decision making about when and where to spend your resources, baiting your opponent, etc. and not this autopilot matches where one player begins to snowball and the other gets this particular card that denies enemy's plan or just lose (at least that's my impression about these last years' meta). HS has never been too complex, but at least I remember some (old) times where there were some decks that required some thinking/maths/whatever, and even if they were really/too strong, at the same time they were somehow A BIT demanding for the player.
Nowadays, with this autopilot meta, people have gotten much more lazy, so now the trend is this turbo-netdecking and "nerf this, nerf that", cause we want it all chewed up (but it's not only with this game, lol). As said, in my opinion it's just a matter of accepting the trend has gone this way, so the minority (where I include myself) has to "try to enjoy" this ecosystem or move on to another game/hobby/more important thing to do than HS.
Just my two cents, have a nice day.
Well spoken. You seem to be a pragmatic idealist as I once was. Warped into a Game Justice Warrior.
We make our world significant through the courage of our questions and the depth of our answers.
What exactly should I learn from a situation where my opponent is using coin to get an early flow or crabrider? I'm seriously curious, please do share.
They need to nerf more because they know that the cards they are printing are to strong, and they don't vare because strong cards means more People buying packs.
The game will never be good again.
I thought about this concept as I was losing the vast majority of my games yesterday afternoon while using an alleged “high legend” control priest deck. Since this exact deck was being used by another player in the top ranks of standard, it had to be my fault i was losing by piloting it incorrectly. However, whenever I played against a Warlock i felt it was legitimately a hopeless cause as Tickatus would mill me into fatigue and 6/6 Infernals were being pumped out every turn. Even now it amazes me how someone could win in those match-ups even 40% to 50% of the time. So although i despise Tickatus as a card I know other people out there are actually seeing success with the deck I’m using, which makes me want to learn what their secret is more than wanting to kill the card outright.