@Dracossack: You could be the Queen of England, have 20 years of game design experience, and be #1 ranked on Asia, EU, and NA. That still would not make people want to be talked down to by you. Others do not have an obligation to you to justify or explain how things work, and although many were polite enough to explain how to use Tink properly, you demanded justification and explanation, and totally ignored the points many had made.
If you don't understand something, ask politely, especially on the internet. That's just solid advice. If you want changes to an existing system, it's your responsibility to demonstrate why changes are necessary. It is not the responsibility of others to do all your thinking and explaining for you, and in all the cultures I have ever experienced, that sort of behavior is considered rude to the point of, well, let's just say it's not acceptable.
Most card games require decision making and assessment of RNG based on probabilities of draws of particular combinations and timing, and understanding of both the deck played and the probable plays of the opposing deck, with understanding of how the probabilities of the timings and strategies of each deck interact, and how and when it is appropriate to exercise decision making to influence those probabilities and outcomes as well as attempting to influence the decision making of the opposing player. There is RNG, there is calculation of probabilities, there is decision making, there is influencing your opponent's decision making.
Since you are the one demanding change, it is your responsibility to show how RNG resolution of a single card effect is substantively different to RNG of drawing particular card combinations, and how exactly it is that the RNG between the two differs to the effect that it has a negative impact on gameplay.
Pretty much it comes down to there is RNG in the game (which is accepted), some players can't accept and don't like RNG in card resolution effects (which is understood and accepted).
Everything you've written to this point, Dracossack, is simply that you don't like the way it works, and that others ought to do what you want. You'll have to do a bit more work than that, and be a lot more diplomatic about it, if you want to get anywhere.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If you see a post that you find objectionable, report it, it helps keep the forum clean. But be aware people are allowed a lot of latitude.
If you find my posts to be rude, objectionable, or whatever, well, I got tired of writing polite TL; DR (Too Long, Didn't Read) posts at crybaby whiners. So now I just make it short and nasty.
If you find that funny, well and good. If you find that sad, that's even better.
Since you are the one demanding change, it is your responsibility to show how RNG resolution of a single card effect is substantively different to RNG of drawing particular card combinations, and how exactly it is that the RNG between the two differs to the effect that it has a negative impact on gameplay.
Because the card effect can easily be changed to no longer involve RNG, unlike the inherent randomness of drawing cards from a shuffled deck. It's not even comparable. You all said it yourself, the card is used for its transform effect to remove a threat. So why is RNG necessary at all?
Consider if Chillwind Yeti was changed to read "Battlecry: At random, either draw 1 card or your opponent draws 1 card". You would be perfectly fine with that yes? You would not consider it a change for the worse? If you would, why?
Edit: I'm currently ignoring the rest of your post because I don't have time to point out everything wrong with it. (Mainly that most of it has no relevance to anything I've posted)
You play Tink with the thought...what am I going to do with a 5/5 afterwards and smile when you get a 1/1. If the 5/5 "breaks your game," then the original target was going to break your game anyway.
Correct. Ignoring the t3 Devil Recruit/Totem play for a moment, if only 1 person plays Tinkmaster and plays it correctly, there's no issue. The problem comes when both players use Tinkmaster (which is likely) and one rolls 1/1 while the other rolls 5/5. No matter how you look at it, that's a huge advantage to the former. To deal with 5 HP requires at least 1 card and some amount of mana (except for very specific cases like Arcanite Reaper), 1 HP usually requires none of either.
The same argument could be made of literally every RNG card in the game. Pagle, Juggler, Rag, Sylvanas.......Every one. My opponent and I make identical Sylvanas plays, his steals a 1/1, mine steals a 4/5. His knife juggler hit me, mine killed his Leeroy. You're problem isn't with the card, its with anything RNG related. In every case, identical plays can be made with drastically different results. Deal with it or move on man.
You have to play around the possibility of the minion becoming a 5/5, otherwise you're doing it wrong. Tinkmaster is definitely a top tier legendary, why should they buff it even further by giving it a guaranteed effect?
No one here seems to understand the fundamental issue. Say for example I play Tinkmaster Overspark on my opponent's Cairne Bloodhoof, and it turns into a 5/5 Devilsaur. I have an answer for the Devilsaur which, at best, costs 1 card/resource. My opponent, in exactly the same position, does the same thing, but gets Squirrel instead, so he doesn't have to use any resources. He is now at a huge advantage from exactly the same correct play.
Justify that to me. Explain why it would be impossible to improve the game without retaining that gamebreaking RNG. I see no reason for it at all, other than an oversight by Blizzard that this card would be incredibly relevant in competitive play.
^ Reread this Marlernx. The point is: Hay, I can deal with a 5/5 no problem, so lets tink it! You get the 5/5 you deal with it easy peasy... Then he does the same to you, but gets the squirrel, hes now ahead, out right, due to RNG and not 'skill' Thats the problem.
Buff Tink? What am I hearing? He's already strong as it is and "everyone" is using him in their decks. If he gets buffed really EVERYONE will use him in their decks. How fun is that? A card that's in every single deck. No thanks. The RNG is not a problem at all.
1. Who said it should be buffed? 2. It's already in practically every single deck :S
And responding to everyone who disagrees with you with, "You're just not as competitive as me", isnt really an argument at all.
Only a casual player would consider the game perfect and thus respond to any suggestion/discussion of balance with "deal with it and move on/play another game". It just shows they have nothing intelligent to say about the game. AFAIK this forum is meant for the competitive aspect of Hearthstone so I'd prefer some competitive opinions instead of this scrubby drivel.
You have to play around the possibility of the minion becoming a 5/5, otherwise you're doing it wrong. Tinkmaster is definitely a top tier legendary, why should they buff it even further by giving it a guaranteed effect?
No one here seems to understand the fundamental issue. Say for example I play Tinkmaster Overspark on my opponent's Cairne Bloodhoof, and it turns into a 5/5 Devilsaur. I have an answer for the Devilsaur which, at best, costs 1 card/resource. My opponent, in exactly the same position, does the same thing, but gets Squirrel instead, so he doesn't have to use any resources. He is now at a huge advantage from exactly the same correct play.
Justify that to me. Explain why it would be impossible to improve the game without retaining that gamebreaking RNG. I see no reason for it at all, other than an oversight by Blizzard that this card would be incredibly relevant in competitive play.
^ Reread this Marlernx. The point is: Hay, I can deal with a 5/5 no problem, so lets tink it! You get the 5/5 you deal with it easy peasy... Then he does the same to you, but gets the squirrel, hes now ahead, out right, due to RNG and not 'skill' Thats the problem.
Well yea I can see that, but the thing is, on top of the game already being RNG due to being a card game, it has a lot of extra RNG effects, not just tinkmaster. So on the other hand you can say that it doesn't matter RNG wise if your opponent gets the 1/1 and you get the 5/5, if your draw has been better than his as well. I personally think Tinkmaster would be even more broken with a "set" effect instead of the rng one.
Yes your right, theres plenty of extra RNG cards that they need to be altered. Tink is just one of the many.
No one here seems to understand the fundamental issue. Say for example I play Tinkmaster Overspark on my opponent's Cairne Bloodhoof, and it turns into a 5/5 Devilsaur. I have an answer for the Devilsaur which, at best, costs 1 card/resource. My opponent, in exactly the same position, does the same thing, but gets Squirrel instead, so he doesn't have to use any resources. He is now at a huge advantage from exactly the same correct play.
Justify that to me. Explain why it would be impossible to improve the game without retaining that gamebreaking RNG. I see no reason for it at all, other than an oversight by Blizzard that this card would be incredibly relevant in competitive play.
I can see what you mean, but a lot of this is very much in line with many of the rest of Hearthstone's cards.
Will my Arcane Missiles hit where I need them? Will my Knife Juggler deal that crucial 1 point of damage on a two health minion so that I can ping it with my hero ability? And many more of the sort.
If any of the above fails, you'd likely need to spend extra resources to deal with the failed situation...if you are able to deal with it at all. The same applies to Tinkmaster. If your RNG fails you'd most likely need to take a different path that you would rather not have done
You're worried that this would make the game un-competitive? Well, I'll share a bit of personal opinion on this matter: Hearthstone in its current state is extremely difficult to be a truly competitive game.
Compare it to other competitive games like say Starcraft. Starcraft's maps do not have any sort of random occurring events that would greatly change the balance of the game, because it attempts to nail everything down to 100% skill as close as possible.
Hearthstone cannot compare in a competitive nature due to the fact that RNG will often make or break the game, from Ragnaros successfully hitting the enemy face to Mad Bomber killing your two-drop.
But does that mean RNG is bad for the game? No, not at all! On the contrary, it's what I think makes Hearthstone stand out so much in its fun factor knowing that one of two, or more extremes might happen based on a lucky dice roll. It's a new, and fresh concept for me in a card game.
I don't think we should all dwell too heavily on making Hearthstone as competitive as possible, which would involve taking out ALL RNG. Instead I think we should just accept Hearthstone as a fun experience that should not be taken overly seriously...and that is not a bad thing at all.
Only a casual player would consider the game perfect and thus respond to any suggestion/discussion of balance with "deal with it and move on/play another game". It just shows they have nothing intelligent to say about the game. AFAIK this forum is meant for the competitive aspect of Hearthstone so I'd prefer some competitive opinions instead of this scrubby drivel.
Actually Hearthpwn is about "everything Hearthstone", with the nice addition of Managrind for various competitive (but not only!) related stuff (reports, tourneys etc.). Anyways, you are not allowed here to harass people. Feel free to discuss things, but be warned, your way of talking is far away from a constructive discussion (especially in a competitive sense).
Consider this a final nice warning ;)
Ontopic: In its current state Hearthstone is fine as it is. Cards come and go, while the meta shifts. (For example:since more and more people play minionheavy decks/classes, tech got more interesting plays) Tinkmaster is an easy counter to anything really big, making anything much easier to handle (as long as it was big enough before). Having an RNG component doesn't make it too unbalanced, just a bit more risky to play under certain conditions. RNG is a key element of Hearthstone, more so than in most other TCGs, due to its digital only nature. Removing this extra RNG entirely, would just kill the "soul" of Hearthstone. Sure, RNG means unbalance, because it is unpredictable, but any TCG I know (and I know a lot) always has a degree of "unbalance", to enrich the meta to healthy levels (otherwise everyone would just play the very same deck).
And finally: Everything "new or changed" from now on, needs to come from new cards.
I think the real problem is not the 50% of the single event to turn into 1/1 Squirrel or 5/5 Devilsaur. It is the omnipresence of cards like Tinkmaster Overspark and Nat Pagle that makes games be a mirror between the RNG involved in those cards. If you do not run them, they are annoying, but you don't get games where both of you have Pagle on the board and both of you use Tinkmaster on the same target, ex. Ragnaros the Firelord and one gets the 1/1 and the other the 5/5. It's very hard to accept when you get bad luck multiple times in a row, it's very frustrating, but the truth is that over a large amount of games the chances even out and you should think in the long term, especially when they Tinkmaster silly targets like Harvest Golem or Chillwind Yeti. Just constantly play smarter and you'll see the results.
Of course, in a tournament setting the single match is everything that counts, so I might see a point in banning these cards.
I think the main reason Blizzard wants the RNG cards in game is that with only 30 card decks and a guaranteed mana crystal every turn decks are way to consistent. If you remove the RNG cards a lot of the match-ups become even more one-sided.
PS. I hate RNG cards. I'm just giving my explanation for their existence.
I'm so glad there is prejudice against playing hunter/zoo/[insert FotM deck here]. People like that make the life so much easier for those of us who play to win.
Tinkmaster Overspark is an answer like Polymorph, Hex, Mind Control and should be treated like that way. The paladins and druid does not have any hard removal, because their flavor, and they will be pretty stronger if they have. There could be way more threats in a deck, than the numbers of answers. You could include Ragnaros the Firelord, Sylvanas Windrunner, Molten Giant and Mountain Giant, Archmage Antonidas (and so on...), but you only can include 2 answers from your class, and a couple of silences. Blizzard made Tinkmaster as a potential answer, which is available to all classes, but at a cost. You need to take risk.
On the other hand:
Blizzard made Hearthstone to be a game of fun, and the matches designed to be short, and replayable in huge numbers. You can highlight that "in a tournament where everything counts", but there is not such a match. However these kind of matches are present in football where you have 1 World Cup every four years, or other sports in the olympic games – one shot in four year. But in Hearthstone, there are a lot of matches in an hour or so. You've got bad RNG? Take another try, or another 5 try, play five-ten-twenty more game, spin that wheel of fortune again, you have a lot of opportunities, don't have to wait another four year, not even 4 hours. Try to relate HS more to online poker, instead of comparing it to the "truly competitive" sports like football. There are hundreds of thousands hands played in online poker rooms in day, every hand has a winner and a(some) loser(s). But this is the pecularity in HS. You've out from a tournament? Okey, there are a lot more today, or tomorrow. It's fine.
And responding to everyone who disagrees with you with, "You're just not as competitive as me", isnt really an argument at all.
Only a casual player would consider the game perfect and thus respond to any suggestion/discussion of balance with "deal with it and move on/play another game". It just shows they have nothing intelligent to say about the game. AFAIK this forum is meant for the competitive aspect of Hearthstone so I'd prefer some competitive opinions instead of this scrubby drivel.
Again....Responding to someone with a different opinion with personal insults.....Im not even sure why this thread is even still open. Pretty disappointed....
And responding to everyone who disagrees with you with, "You're just not as competitive as me", isnt really an argument at all.
Only a casual player would consider the game perfect and thus respond to any suggestion/discussion of balance with "deal with it and move on/play another game". It just shows they have nothing intelligent to say about the game. AFAIK this forum is meant for the competitive aspect of Hearthstone so I'd prefer some competitive opinions instead of this scrubby drivel.
Again....Responding to someone with a different opinion with personal insults.....Im not even sure why this thread is even still open. Pretty disappointed....
Not directly, but you are being rather passive aggressive by calling out people on being "casual", "having nothing intelligent to say", and "wanting real talk instead of scrubby drivel"
Enough of this though, I'd hate for us to bite each other's heads off. This is a topic that I am quite interested in discussing. Dracossack, I made a post regarding this issue on the previous page. If you're up for it, I'd like to hear your opinions on it.
Also re: "competitive mindset" - Wanting to minimize elements of chance is not indicative of a competitive mindset, but a controlling one. Anyone that disagrees with what you wrote simply isn't competitive? hmph.
No, anyone who thinks the game is perfect and whose first response to a suggested improvement is "if you don't like the game, move on" isn't competitive. I'd like those people to stay well away from such discussions because, as you can see, it derails threads and causes way too much trouble for nothing. Someone with a competitive mindset who disagreed would bring some valid reasoning as to why Tinkmaster's design is optimal while it involves RNG.
Kreekakon, I do see what you are saying but I am not advocating to remove all RNG from card effects. A lot of the RNG only introduces small variance, the different outcomes don't have a large difference in impact on the game. Many of them use RNG just to balance the numbers (eg Arcane Missiles, Mad Bomber) which makes sense if that's the way Blizzard want to do it. Tinkmaster's two outcomes have a hugely different impact on the game though and it introduces a LOT of variance.
I once again present you with this: Consider if Chillwind Yeti was changed to read "Battlecry: At random, either draw 1 card or your opponent draws 1 card". Would you be fine with that?
Not one person has said the game is perfect. Stop mis-quoting people please. Im saying your suggested "improvement" is not an improvement at all. Its unnecessary and would make the card overpowered. The card isnt perfect, but making it a static hex into a 3/3 would straight up break the card IMO. Also, people have provided several examples of other cards that can be played in identical situations with drastically different, game altering results. I dont see tinkmaster being a bigger issue than any of the other RNG cards in the game. The great thing is, you are free to leave every one if them out of your deck. None of them are "game breaking" as you put it.
Also, chillwind yeti is a common card, so the text you gave as an example would be odd to see. However, if a later card was added that was a 4/5 and had that text, i would be fine with it. It would be another option for players to consider.
@Dracossack: You could be the Queen of England, have 20 years of game design experience, and be #1 ranked on Asia, EU, and NA. That still would not make people want to be talked down to by you. Others do not have an obligation to you to justify or explain how things work, and although many were polite enough to explain how to use Tink properly, you demanded justification and explanation, and totally ignored the points many had made.
If you don't understand something, ask politely, especially on the internet. That's just solid advice. If you want changes to an existing system, it's your responsibility to demonstrate why changes are necessary. It is not the responsibility of others to do all your thinking and explaining for you, and in all the cultures I have ever experienced, that sort of behavior is considered rude to the point of, well, let's just say it's not acceptable.
Most card games require decision making and assessment of RNG based on probabilities of draws of particular combinations and timing, and understanding of both the deck played and the probable plays of the opposing deck, with understanding of how the probabilities of the timings and strategies of each deck interact, and how and when it is appropriate to exercise decision making to influence those probabilities and outcomes as well as attempting to influence the decision making of the opposing player. There is RNG, there is calculation of probabilities, there is decision making, there is influencing your opponent's decision making.
Since you are the one demanding change, it is your responsibility to show how RNG resolution of a single card effect is substantively different to RNG of drawing particular card combinations, and how exactly it is that the RNG between the two differs to the effect that it has a negative impact on gameplay.
Pretty much it comes down to there is RNG in the game (which is accepted), some players can't accept and don't like RNG in card resolution effects (which is understood and accepted).
Everything you've written to this point, Dracossack, is simply that you don't like the way it works, and that others ought to do what you want. You'll have to do a bit more work than that, and be a lot more diplomatic about it, if you want to get anywhere.
If you see a post that you find objectionable, report it, it helps keep the forum clean. But be aware people are allowed a lot of latitude.
If you find my posts to be rude, objectionable, or whatever, well, I got tired of writing polite TL; DR (Too Long, Didn't Read) posts at crybaby whiners. So now I just make it short and nasty.
If you find that funny, well and good. If you find that sad, that's even better.
Because the card effect can easily be changed to no longer involve RNG, unlike the inherent randomness of drawing cards from a shuffled deck. It's not even comparable. You all said it yourself, the card is used for its transform effect to remove a threat. So why is RNG necessary at all?
Consider if Chillwind Yeti was changed to read "Battlecry: At random, either draw 1 card or your opponent draws 1 card". You would be perfectly fine with that yes? You would not consider it a change for the worse? If you would, why?
Edit: I'm currently ignoring the rest of your post because I don't have time to point out everything wrong with it. (Mainly that most of it has no relevance to anything I've posted)
Correct. Ignoring the t3 Devil Recruit/Totem play for a moment, if only 1 person plays Tinkmaster and plays it correctly, there's no issue. The problem comes when both players use Tinkmaster (which is likely) and one rolls 1/1 while the other rolls 5/5. No matter how you look at it, that's a huge advantage to the former. To deal with 5 HP requires at least 1 card and some amount of mana (except for very specific cases like Arcanite Reaper), 1 HP usually requires none of either.
The same argument could be made of literally every RNG card in the game. Pagle, Juggler, Rag, Sylvanas.......Every one. My opponent and I make identical Sylvanas plays, his steals a 1/1, mine steals a 4/5. His knife juggler hit me, mine killed his Leeroy. You're problem isn't with the card, its with anything RNG related. In every case, identical plays can be made with drastically different results. Deal with it or move on man.
And responding to everyone who disagrees with you with, "You're just not as competitive as me", isnt really an argument at all.
^ Reread this Marlernx. The point is: Hay, I can deal with a 5/5 no problem, so lets tink it! You get the 5/5 you deal with it easy peasy... Then he does the same to you, but gets the squirrel, hes now ahead, out right, due to RNG and not 'skill' Thats the problem.
1. Who said it should be buffed?
2. It's already in practically every single deck :S
Only a casual player would consider the game perfect and thus respond to any suggestion/discussion of balance with "deal with it and move on/play another game". It just shows they have nothing intelligent to say about the game. AFAIK this forum is meant for the competitive aspect of Hearthstone so I'd prefer some competitive opinions instead of this scrubby drivel.
Yes your right, theres plenty of extra RNG cards that they need to be altered. Tink is just one of the many.
I can see what you mean, but a lot of this is very much in line with many of the rest of Hearthstone's cards.
Will my Arcane Missiles hit where I need them? Will my Knife Juggler deal that crucial 1 point of damage on a two health minion so that I can ping it with my hero ability? And many more of the sort.
If any of the above fails, you'd likely need to spend extra resources to deal with the failed situation...if you are able to deal with it at all. The same applies to Tinkmaster. If your RNG fails you'd most likely need to take a different path that you would rather not have done
----------------------------------------------------------
You're worried that this would make the game un-competitive? Well, I'll share a bit of personal opinion on this matter: Hearthstone in its current state is extremely difficult to be a truly competitive game.
Compare it to other competitive games like say Starcraft. Starcraft's maps do not have any sort of random occurring events that would greatly change the balance of the game, because it attempts to nail everything down to 100% skill as close as possible.
Hearthstone cannot compare in a competitive nature due to the fact that RNG will often make or break the game, from Ragnaros successfully hitting the enemy face to Mad Bomber killing your two-drop.
But does that mean RNG is bad for the game? No, not at all! On the contrary, it's what I think makes Hearthstone stand out so much in its fun factor knowing that one of two, or more extremes might happen based on a lucky dice roll. It's a new, and fresh concept for me in a card game.
I don't think we should all dwell too heavily on making Hearthstone as competitive as possible, which would involve taking out ALL RNG. Instead I think we should just accept Hearthstone as a fun experience that should not be taken overly seriously...and that is not a bad thing at all.
Kreek's Fast/Control Zoo [GUIDE] [ASIA Server High Ranking Deck, Highest Rank 1 with 3 Stars]
Actually Hearthpwn is about "everything Hearthstone", with the nice addition of Managrind for various competitive (but not only!) related stuff (reports, tourneys etc.).
Anyways, you are not allowed here to harass people. Feel free to discuss things, but be warned, your way of talking is far away from a constructive discussion (especially in a competitive sense).
Consider this a final nice warning ;)
Ontopic: In its current state Hearthstone is fine as it is.
Cards come and go, while the meta shifts.
(For example:since more and more people play minionheavy decks/classes, tech got more interesting plays)
Tinkmaster is an easy counter to anything really big, making anything much easier to handle (as long as it was big enough before). Having an RNG component doesn't make it too unbalanced, just a bit more risky to play under certain conditions.
RNG is a key element of Hearthstone, more so than in most other TCGs, due to its digital only nature.
Removing this extra RNG entirely, would just kill the "soul" of Hearthstone.
Sure, RNG means unbalance, because it is unpredictable, but any TCG I know (and I know a lot) always has a degree of "unbalance", to enrich the meta to healthy levels (otherwise everyone would just play the very same deck).
And finally:
Everything "new or changed" from now on, needs to come from new cards.
Please report toxic behaviour and unwanted threads, so the moderators can deal with them.
I think the real problem is not the 50% of the single event to turn into 1/1 Squirrel or 5/5 Devilsaur. It is the omnipresence of cards like Tinkmaster Overspark and Nat Pagle that makes games be a mirror between the RNG involved in those cards. If you do not run them, they are annoying, but you don't get games where both of you have Pagle on the board and both of you use Tinkmaster on the same target, ex. Ragnaros the Firelord and one gets the 1/1 and the other the 5/5. It's very hard to accept when you get bad luck multiple times in a row, it's very frustrating, but the truth is that over a large amount of games the chances even out and you should think in the long term, especially when they Tinkmaster silly targets like Harvest Golem or Chillwind Yeti. Just constantly play smarter and you'll see the results.
Of course, in a tournament setting the single match is everything that counts, so I might see a point in banning these cards.
I think the main reason Blizzard wants the RNG cards in game is that with only 30 card decks and a guaranteed mana crystal every turn decks are way to consistent. If you remove the RNG cards a lot of the match-ups become even more one-sided.
PS. I hate RNG cards. I'm just giving my explanation for their existence.
I'm so glad there is prejudice against playing hunter/zoo/[insert FotM deck here]. People like that make the life so much easier for those of us who play to win.
Tinkmaster Overspark is an answer like Polymorph, Hex, Mind Control and should be treated like that way. The paladins and druid does not have any hard removal, because their flavor, and they will be pretty stronger if they have. There could be way more threats in a deck, than the numbers of answers. You could include Ragnaros the Firelord, Sylvanas Windrunner, Molten Giant and Mountain Giant, Archmage Antonidas (and so on...), but you only can include 2 answers from your class, and a couple of silences. Blizzard made Tinkmaster as a potential answer, which is available to all classes, but at a cost. You need to take risk.
On the other hand:
Blizzard made Hearthstone to be a game of fun, and the matches designed to be short, and replayable in huge numbers. You can highlight that "in a tournament where everything counts", but there is not such a match. However these kind of matches are present in football where you have 1 World Cup every four years, or other sports in the olympic games – one shot in four year. But in Hearthstone, there are a lot of matches in an hour or so. You've got bad RNG? Take another try, or another 5 try, play five-ten-twenty more game, spin that wheel of fortune again, you have a lot of opportunities, don't have to wait another four year, not even 4 hours. Try to relate HS more to online poker, instead of comparing it to the "truly competitive" sports like football. There are hundreds of thousands hands played in online poker rooms in day, every hand has a winner and a(some) loser(s). But this is the pecularity in HS. You've out from a tournament? Okey, there are a lot more today, or tomorrow. It's fine.
Again....Responding to someone with a different opinion with personal insults.....Im not even sure why this thread is even still open. Pretty disappointed....
So where exactly did I personally insult someone?
Not directly, but you are being rather passive aggressive by calling out people on being "casual", "having nothing intelligent to say", and "wanting real talk instead of scrubby drivel"
Enough of this though, I'd hate for us to bite each other's heads off. This is a topic that I am quite interested in discussing. Dracossack, I made a post regarding this issue on the previous page. If you're up for it, I'd like to hear your opinions on it.
Kreek's Fast/Control Zoo [GUIDE] [ASIA Server High Ranking Deck, Highest Rank 1 with 3 Stars]
No, anyone who thinks the game is perfect and whose first response to a suggested improvement is "if you don't like the game, move on" isn't competitive. I'd like those people to stay well away from such discussions because, as you can see, it derails threads and causes way too much trouble for nothing. Someone with a competitive mindset who disagreed would bring some valid reasoning as to why Tinkmaster's design is optimal while it involves RNG.
Kreekakon, I do see what you are saying but I am not advocating to remove all RNG from card effects. A lot of the RNG only introduces small variance, the different outcomes don't have a large difference in impact on the game. Many of them use RNG just to balance the numbers (eg Arcane Missiles, Mad Bomber) which makes sense if that's the way Blizzard want to do it. Tinkmaster's two outcomes have a hugely different impact on the game though and it introduces a LOT of variance.
I once again present you with this: Consider if Chillwind Yeti was changed to read "Battlecry: At random, either draw 1 card or your opponent draws 1 card". Would you be fine with that?
Not one person has said the game is perfect. Stop mis-quoting people please. Im saying your suggested "improvement" is not an improvement at all. Its unnecessary and would make the card overpowered. The card isnt perfect, but making it a static hex into a 3/3 would straight up break the card IMO. Also, people have provided several examples of other cards that can be played in identical situations with drastically different, game altering results. I dont see tinkmaster being a bigger issue than any of the other RNG cards in the game. The great thing is, you are free to leave every one if them out of your deck. None of them are "game breaking" as you put it.
Also, chillwind yeti is a common card, so the text you gave as an example would be odd to see. However, if a later card was added that was a 4/5 and had that text, i would be fine with it. It would be another option for players to consider.