⚙
Learn More
Cosmetics
Related Cards
Card Pools
✕
×
PopCard Settings
Click on the buttons to change the PopCard background.
Elements settings
Click on the button to hide or unhide popcard elements.
Click on the buttons to change the PopCard background.
Click on the button to hide or unhide popcard elements.
you still get mana flooded or get no mana at all at least hearthstone that cant hapeen but lol i wish dual lands were $60 i would buy them there more like 150-300
Skilled deckbuilding is not about "eliminating" RNG, but managing it. You didn't run counterspell to "manage RNG", but to knock key pieces out of an opponent's combo, or for timing purposes.
Being "wowed" at a price tag of $600 is nothing. I played Magic: The Gathering, Yugioh, and Pokemon. My last Yugioh deck clocked in with a price tag of around $2,800 USD. Some friends told me I ought to buy and substitute in some cards that would have brought that total to $3,700, but I declined (not because of price, but because I didn't see their recommendations as being better than what I already had). If you're running a deck with Magic: The Gathering "Power 9", probably the total cost will come in at least $5,000 (or at least it was last time I bothered pricing it; dual lands and all). World Championships are typically modern set, though, so don't use Power 9 cards. I just don't want people thinking that it only costs $600 and some study to be a top champion in card games, especially in unlimited formats. It's a LOT pricier.
Hearthstone has a lot of differences to Magic: The Gathering that make comparison inaccurate.
1. Magic: The Gathering Online allows tradeins of virtual sets for real sets, and has a higher price tag. MTG Online has also been in service for years; its early years had its share of problems. (Some would say it has issues now, but they *weren't* on in the early days, now is nothing like then)
2. MTG has been around for years and years, and has thousands of cards and dozens of expansions. Hearthstone doesn't have the card pool that MtG has yet. So when players say "oh, you have card draw", they're not just talking about Ancestral Recall or Braingeyser from the original sets, they're talking about new draw engines like Cadaverous Bloom and Prosperity, or unblockable Coastal Piracy, or Hermetic Crab / Brass Man / Quicksilver Dagger, or whatever. When they talk about tutors, it's not just Demonic Tutor, but now Vampiric Tutor, and Enlightened Tutor, and what all. When Hearthstone has five or six expansions under its belt, you're sure to see added card draw and tutor effects; it's just a matter of time. There's already Sense Demons, so you *know* tutors aren't something the design team overlooked, and of course card draw with Mana Tide Totem and bunches of other things.
3. MTG mana mechanic has been criticized a lot by game designers.
4. You can't trade cards with Hearthstone. I would have given away so many cards that I just couldn't use. "A third Lord Jaraxxus? Meh."
As far as RNG goes, old school MTG players will remember Chaos Orb, plus there were a lot of card flipping cards out of Unglued. All banned. (Unglued was never a "serious" set to begin with, but Chaos Orb wasn't) Plus there was the old 56-swamp 4-Darkpact decks for ante. It's REALLY not as if MtG hasn't had its share of "d'oh" moments; they've been conveniently shoved under the rug and forgotten, but I was there, and I remember.
Anyways, enough with the "eliminate RNG" comments yeah? Deckbuilders know you don't *eliminate* RNG, you *manage* it. If you want to eliminate RNG, you play chess or go, both fine games without RNG. If you want to minimize RNG, that's your personal preference, but let's not be talking about how it's more "competitive" to minimize RNG. Personal preference = personal preference, not competitiveness.
"But he dropped Nat Pagle on turn 1 with coin, and I RNG'd out of all my removal, and Nat drew him 4 cards in a row, so he won! RNG is all there is to this game! RNG is all there is!" News flash, you're supposed to *deal* with RNG; that's what separates scrubs from champions. Sometimes you have good luck, sometimes you have bad luck, but you deal with it, and sometimes you win, and sometimes you lose, but you deal with it.
I've dealt with a lot of people in a lot of situations, and the people that come in loaded to the gills with preconceptions "you need money, you need connections, you need this, you need that, all these things I don't have, failure, failure, nothing but failure" - fact is, they *do* fail, because they spend all their time thinking about failure. They expect failure, they're satisfied with failure, they accept failure. The ones that don't say things like "veterans should have a significant advantage over newbs" are the warriors that eventually go out and kick ass, because their eyes aren't clouded with all these ideas about how things SHOULD be or WOULD be or COULD be; they just see things for what they ARE, and they deal with it.
YES, RNG plays a role in determining champions, and that's *okay by some people*, including myself. There's a reason why card tournaments tend to run on Swiss rather than single-elimination; anyone opening a debate on RNG ought to well know why.
As a parting admonition - look, yeah, okay, people have their opinions, and they're entitled to them. But let's not keep repeating this slag about how you need to "eliminate RNG to be competitive" or "if you're skilled, you eliminate RNG". Constant mischaracterization and hyperbole undercut your argument. Look at the story of the boy who cried wolf. THERE'S A WOLF! (everyone comes running, no wolf). THERE'S A WOLF! (everyone comes running, no wolf). THERE'S A WOLF! (nobody comes running because they think the boy's just mad for attention, but an actual wolf showed up and has lots of meaty snacks).
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.
I am sorry you didn't understand my post. It would seem, from your comments of course, that we agree on the same things. I stated JtMS's price tag to explain why MTG's casual and core customer base fell off a cliff; the game was not only frustrating with him dominating it but extremely cost prohibitive. You have numerous references to how costly the cards are, so I assume you unknowingly agree with me. You also have numerous examples of how people would thin their deck of RNG, a topic I addressed as well. Assuming I've read your post correctly and understand it's defensive tone, you agree with me here again but with the caveat of you not knowing it.
You are, in a way, contradicting yourself here. There are also references later on to counterspells and tutors as ways to eliminate RNG. These in addition to lands are all perfect examples as to how MTG is as RNG heavy if not more so than Hearthstone. Furthermore, they do the game developers credit in these attempts to make the game more fun and easier to play.
When next you are responding to someone's post, it will benefit us all when your valuable input is not laced with contempt and disdain.
Lastly, I do apologize for the misstep in stating lands are the only RNG in MTG. My intent was to illustrate the significance of the game's resource management and its relevance to the original topic. I believe Tinkmaster Overspark, Nat Pagle and the majority of the remaining RNG cards are essential to this game's survival and development. If "pros" don't want them in their private tournaments, who am I to disagree. But this game was not created for the tiny fraction of "pros" who play against themselves. It was created to make money, and it will continue to do just that, with it's limited but not limiting nail-biting random number generating glory.
Well the nerf confirms what I posted earlier, that Tinkmaster's staple status in the competitive scene was overlooked by Blizzard and they always intended it to be a "for fun" card (akin to Gelbin Mekkatorque)
Unless they change Tink Master to affect only enemy creatures, I can see him falling to oblivion. Btw, I do agree that some RNG makes game interesting but too much RNG will just destroy the game. There's not much strategy anymore, you just simply throw in card hoping for good effect to take place otherwise simply concede. As such, cards which revolves too much around RNG which can potentially harm you will forever be ignored. For example if Rag is changed to deal 8 dmg to a random character, I doubt people would want to run it.
A lot of people don't seem to understand... the change to Tink was akin to removing him from the game because Blizzard did not like the way he was played, how he fit in decks, and what it did to the meta. He has (had?) the same meta-defining aspects of Pyroblast and Mind Control. Aside from control warrior and lock, the meta is very aggro focused by Tink can just take out your big threat and can force an auto-lose.
People were asking Blizzard to change the card and there was talk about him being banned from tournaments. Then he gets nerfed and a bunch of people QQ about it? It's a good change, and the change was designed to remove him from competitive/high-end ranked play for the most part.
RNG its a cost reduction eff, you arent forced to inclued it on your deck, and if you do, dont complain later about "bad luck".
I completely agree with you. The problem is that Tinkmaster has far too much RNG to manage now. It's only going to be effective in very specific situations. You don't throw a card into your deck for that 1-in-20 chance it'll be an effective play. The other 19 times out of 20, it's a dead card in your deck.
Poetic.
I recently got Tink, and was running him as a 3rd hex. The funny thing about it was that I always used him on my totems, and always got a devilsaur. I used the card about 10 times until this nerf, and always turned my totem into a 5/5. Good thing I never used it on my enemy's minions. R.I.P. Tinkmaster, you are useless now.
RNG simply means that something isn't consistent- it adds a luck factor. Sure, this can be managed. In all TCGs, there's luck built in- in card effects, in your draws, etc. Knowing how to work with it (e.g. I draw a card next turn. I have 2 Fireball and 2 Argent commander in a 12-card deck, so that's a 1/3 chance to draw into lethal if I go for the face. Maybe it's safer to remove his minions rather than play aggressively, even if it drags out the game) is a skill good players need to be able to work with. It's using game theory/probability/statistics to your advantage, which you should.
However, the nature of luck-based factors is tricky. It's a narrow line between useless RNG effects (ones where the expected value or rate of success is very low despite having strong possible outcomes- e.g. a 25% chance to do 8 damage for 4 mana is, statistically, 4 mana deal 2 damage. No good player should run it because its expected ROI is low) and overly impactful luck (if that same card was a bit cheaper, that 25% chance would be broken because it would decide too many games- the winner would not be based on skill, just where the dice land). Even random draw can play into this; in a metagame with the old Pyroblast, mage mirrors could be based on who uses Pyro first more than skill, and who goes first is a win-or-lose prospect in some games. Another example of the first type is Gelbin or ETC, who have random effects that make them not worth playing.
However, Hearthstone is pretty good at managing RNG. Most RNG effects are well-balanced (even going 1st v 2nd, and initial draws due to mulligan system). However, they aren't extremely competitive even then. To make the game competitive, Blizzard is trying to mediate luck- Nat Pagle still draws 50% per turn, but it's less strong now.
So, the Tink change, IMO, is kind of irritating. It takes a card that had mostly-manageable RNG (in most cases, even guaranteeing the Devilsaur would be OK for the user) and a clear purpose in the game- beating Rag, Ysera, etc. in the classes without good removal options- and makes it into an RNG gimmick with no competitive significance. I think that type of removal is good for the game, but I guess we'll see.
Im glad people are still posting the same thing dispite the explination being repeated over and over.
If you use tink, and get a squirrel, thats a big plus for you. Your opponent uses tink, and gets a devilsaur, he then proceeds to clear the devilsaur... He is now incredibly behind. Not because your good, not because hes bad, but because of RNG.
RNG is bad for compeditive play. You can't argue against that.
You are not forced to includ RNG cards on your deck. Even MTG have competitive decks plays around some RNG like warp wolrd.deck, deal with it or suffer it.
Seems like you don't get the point. RNG card is fine if it serves the user intended purpose. For example, Nat Pagle draws card with 50%, his purpose is to increase the user card advantage. He may or may not draw it with RNG but he's always a plus ( board control + removal/silence bait). Pagle never backfire. Similarly, it doesn't matter who Rag hits, he always hit with 8 dmg so whenever you put down the card, you know you get something in return. Tink Master's RNG, on the other hand, has gone out of control. Previously he was used as a way to remove strong effect from other cards, doesn't matter the outcome ( Devilsaur or Squirrel). Now, with the double RNG, it's impossible to get anything from Tink Master. He can't serve any purpose aside from making a possible 5/5 from your own argent squire in a clean board which also involves another RNG.
Imagine the change to Tink Master is almost similar to. Pagle: has 50% chance to draw a card for either you or you opponent.
I'll say it again. Blizzard clearly always intended Tinkmaster to be a "for fun" card like Gelbin Mekkatorque. They deliberately nerfed it to a level where it is no longer viable in competitive play.
I don't get it, what change are you talking about? He still transforms a target minion into either a Devilsaur or a Squirrel, 50:50 chance. Or have they changed that? I don't see how he shouldn't be viable in this state, he's basically always giving you an advantage if you play him on an enemy minion with at least 5/5 stats and an ability.
He transforms a random other minion into either a Devilsaur or Squirrel. It's no longer targeted, which means you're at another layer of mercy from RNGesus