Hearthpwn

Quote from DubberOne >>

Quote from Balthier21 >>

Quote from DubberOne >>

This discussion is soooo pointless. People still fail to understand that its not the Change we are complaining about, but the way it comes. The whole picture from the very beginning of Hearthstone. As long as people belive, that Blizzard made Naxx/GvG or Myserious Challenger OverPowered by accident, there is no hope in discussing any further.

 they didnt make them by accident but those cards shouldnt stay in the game or at least the main mode forever for obvious reasons. when a class gets some early game tools the same shit happens again again.... what shit? well the naxxramas broken cancer party joins this class. example at first only warlock and hunter were using naxxramas cancer army then paladin followed now shaman followed too. the same would happen to all other classes if they gave them some tools for it.

same shit creeper knife juggler scientists eggs charges..... do you believe the game would survive in an environment like that? in 1-2 years from now hearthstone would have fallen out of popularity way too much. before they announced standard i had 1 month to not even login into the game and i play for 1 year.

now you want what? full refund for what? you bought these products (golden cards or whatever) and their content havent changed. if they made a card broken creeper 2/3 deathrattle spawn two 1/1 spiders your already owned creppers would be useless. but then you would shut the fuck up and not made a 40 pages thread with whining in it. you wanted blizzard to guarantee you that the cards which you crafted in golden would be viable forever??? in which fucking world you live? when i was playing yugioh dark armed dragon was like 200 $ per piece and when it got banned its practical value became 0. but i ddint see anyone making threads like konami you scammed us wtf give us our money back. thats card games something newer will replace the old its just the method that differs (banlist or formats). they are nice enough to offer you full dust value for the cards they change but why should they compensate you for something that is not changed at all?

if they had a banlist and said were going to ban creeper,scientist,boom,egg,juggler etc etc what would you do then? your fucking cards wouldnt be playable in any mode then. but if you had a functional brain to think you wouldnt start this thread at all

 I honestly want nothing anymore, because demanding something for what you paid is somehow seen as a very bad move by some people here.

I just want people to understand, that this Move was very well studied from the very beginning of Hearthstone. It was planned to implement OP stuff. Yeah, you thought we made mistakes? Fuck off, this mistakes were planned, Scumbag and you still bought it. EVEN NOW you are too stupid to understand the truth. Naxx, GVG, Mysterious Challenger being OP was planned from the beginning. I could believe that it were real mistakes, if Blizzard would be a fresh company, but they are a big and old fish in this Online Business knowing what they are doing.

Yes, please, keep loving Blizzard and what they are doing. Embrace this change, you people were discussing since Gvg/Naxx came out, while Blizzard was laughing their asses off, because everything moved with their plans. I debt you also believein Donald Trump and his lies.

I dont want anything, just pointing out the truth, no one here was able to argue against. Try it. Find arguments against these points:

- GvG/Naxx were planned to be OP for the Players to cry about changes. Thats why the following Content was less OP, to point the OPness of NAxx/GvG out. And please, tell me, that didnt worked out...WITH evidence!

- Mysterious Challenger was planned. Yes, Ben Brode, keep on talking that you never thought MC would have such an impact. YOU KNEW IT! Blizzard wanted Naxx to get sold out before rotating out, because Avenge, the secret you, wait for it...., only get in the last Wing *applause*, was hardly needed for the Deck. In the end it makes sense. Make Content, that needs the previous content to get that sold to maximum.

Quote from Geiski >>

Quote from MalakyEx >>

"cosmetics" "you were willing to pay for that online copy of a golden card"

"I wasn't talking about golden cards, I swear"

Newsflash: signing an user's license doesn't mean you should blindly accept whatever thing a PR or authority figure tries shoving down your throat.

 I also stated, you seem to have some trouble reading, that golden could be replaced by ANY card. Ye I used goldens as example because that WAS the topic, but I wasn't really talking about goldens in particular opposing to any other card. But oke, since you keep missing the point I was making because you focus so hard on goldens lets change it to: "you were willing to pay for that online copy of a card"

Also newsflash (also in regard to @nocontrol1111 s comment) Do you have any idea what a users license means? It's something different to getting ownership, although you have some rights. You did go into a binding contract ( which you accepted (yes you did, you have to or you can't play the game) on the terms that blizzard put in the agreement (the eula). If they make changes which are within the boundaries of the terms you agreed on in the contract (which you probably clicked away in 1 second) than yes, you do have to accept them blindly, in fact you already did. In almost every jurisdiction in the world there is a certain freedom in whatever you and another party can agree on in a contract. If this change would be beyond the terms you and blizzard agreed on, than yes you have the right (figure of speech, in terms of law you are always free) to complain. If it's within the terms than you re better of reading whatever contract you sign next time, tough luck buddy.

If you ment "accepting" as a figure of speech, than okay, i give you that one of course you can discuss wether its a wise decision according to your opinion. But the fact is you signed for it, if it s within the terms than you also have to accept it (blindly), because you were free to sign the contract (eula, ye it's binding, just because it's a digital contract doesnt mean it's less binding. You just dont have any obligations in terms of payment. Also even a verbal contract is usually binding (exceptions there) it's just harder to prove in court that there is a contract and what the terms were without it being written down).

Since you actually agreed on a contract in which is stated that the content creators can make changes to the game at any given time, without your permission, it can't be a scam (thats my main point, I get that you maybe don't like not getting refund, but again tough luck buddy). It just happened that you probably didn't read what you got into and what you paid for.

LOL is everyone still arguing?

I wonder if anyone has changed their minds on this...

just agree to disagree, let this thread die already

Quote from zezetoni >>

Quote from Tze >>

So I looked it up and as early as May of last year Blizzard was already telling people in interviews that they were going to have to establish a solution down the road and that after awhile sheer card quantity with the current design was going to be prohibitive to new players. For those arguing there was no foreshadowing you have:

- Eric Dodds in an interview with Gamesradar (May 2015) saying "One of those issues does surround the adding of new cards, because we know we can’t just keep adding cards forever. It’s important to figure out solutions to that kind of thing".

- Hamilton Chu in an interview with GameSpot (August 2015) saying "Adding more cards is going to make it harder and harder for new players" and that "This is something we're going to have to figure out how to manage and how to address in the long term. There's no easy answer."

- Ben Brode in an interview with PC Gamer (September 2015) saying "It’s tricky. In order to shake up the meta we have to make powerful, exciting cards, so that players make new decks and try new things. And we want to do that, we want to shake the meta up, but if we just keep making more and more powerful cards over time, it warps a little bit what Hearthstone is. Right now, for 2 mana you get a 3/2 with an upside, but as things keep getting more powerful you get a 3/3 for 2 mana with an upside, and so it’s scary that we have to either shake up the meta up by making more powerful cards, or make cards people aren’t excited about. A way to handle that that we’re currently looking at is what we call ‘sideways design’, where instead of making cards that are just better, we make cards that are situationally better. If you use this card you have to use dragons, and if you use this card, you have to use mechs—but it doesn’t just increase the overall power. We can only do that for so long though, and we’re looking at other ways that we can solve this core problem of continually adding cards to the game. But yes, sideways design is a way we can mitigate that somewhat."

Maybe this is why I'm not surprised, or particularly understanding of why people feel like things were going to be perpetually playable in all formats. They weren't even trying to be subtle, it was already public knowledge they were looking at doing this and the three articles I posted were basically the first three I found on it (I remember a blue post regarding it as well, but honestly me digging through months and months of blue posts is not going to prove my point any more or less). I feel for the players who legitimately don't follow Hearthpwn/Reddit/etc, who only got notice after they managed to get the "New Way To Play" banner onto mobile; I feel for the guys/girls that just started the game and crafted Boom right before the announcement happened, because it may not have been what they really wanted to devote resources to if it was going to be relegated to Wild.

The people complaining hardest in this thread are not those players, and they're not new to the community. They commonly view one of the biggest outlets of Hearthstone news you can find (which is known for prominently displaying interviews with the Devs), and they've got the nerve to argue Wild not giving HWC points makes it too "uncompetitive" for their taste. On top of that the amount of smug self-satisfaction about being "smarter" than the number of people who have had the patience to discuss alternate points of view on a topic that's subjective, while you present little to no factual evidence to back up any claims, is why whatever bit of sympathy I had for your plight has basically just turned into pure schadenfreude regarding the future of your collection.

I'm a big proponent of speaking with your wallet and spending your money on what you feel is going to provide you with adequate entertainment value, so for those leaving the game due to the changes I wish you the best. Hopefully in the future you can find something that disappoints you less.

Standard is good for changing the meta every time a rotation happen and let new players in but thats just it, they may feel less overwhelmed at the start but in the long run like everyone else will feel overwhelmed due to losing core cards every rotation and 2 expansions back to back. The price barrier is higher than ever with this measures and in the long run it will be proven to be true.

The other bad aspect of standard is the shadow that will cast on wild one of the most potential mode in the long run due to the big amount of card pool. What pisses me the most is their unwillily stance of nerfing problematic overused cards that could help wild in the long run to be a more healthy enviroment for those who wish wild is they way to play. The game is big enough for both modes to prosper so i really dont understand the neccesity to give a death sentence to a mode that could be awesome.

TL:DL Releasing standard is no escuse to neglet wild format to oblivion, They could easly balance both formats every year by nerfing problematic cards without interfering with standard.

People who call paying into Hearthstone an "investment", what is your return? You can't sell the cards for money because no one in their right mind would pay for an account full of golden cards for more money than its worth. If you spent a shitton of money for golded cards for the sake of having golden cards, mission accomplished, that's as far as your money is going to take you.

Quote from ponk87 >>

Quote from GralQ >>

Quote from raochu >>

LOL is everyone still arguing?

I wonder if anyone has changed their minds on this...

just agree to disagree, let this thread die already

 I think it means that there is geniunely a lot of unhappy players with this move. We hope blizzard implements something that relieves our loss a lot, so that's the urgency to come here and express the concern.

A reduced set of users come here to insult us though, i dont know what they profit from it. But that's good to keep this as the most growing thread in hearthpwn so we thank them

Points are standing, we dont want blizzard to scam us

 Blizzard doesn't give two shits about this thread. most of the player base is happy with the changes it's only the loud minority that keeps this thread alive.

Quote from ponk87 >>

Quote from GralQ >>

Quote from raochu >>

LOL is everyone still arguing?

I wonder if anyone has changed their minds on this...

just agree to disagree, let this thread die already

 I think it means that there is geniunely a lot of unhappy players with this move. We hope blizzard implements something that relieves our loss a lot, so that's the urgency to come here and express the concern.

A reduced set of users come here to insult us though, i dont know what they profit from it. But that's good to keep this as the most growing thread in hearthpwn so we thank them

Points are standing, we dont want blizzard to scam us

 Blizzard doesn't give two shits about this thread. most of the player base is happy with the changes it's only the loud minority that keeps this thread alive.

Quote from Tze >>

Quote from zezetoni >>

Quote from Tze >>

So I looked it up and as early as May of last year Blizzard was already telling people in interviews that they were going to have to establish a solution down the road and that after awhile sheer card quantity with the current design was going to be prohibitive to new players. For those arguing there was no foreshadowing you have:

- Eric Dodds in an interview with Gamesradar (May 2015) saying "One of those issues does surround the adding of new cards, because we know we can’t just keep adding cards forever. It’s important to figure out solutions to that kind of thing".

- Hamilton Chu in an interview with GameSpot (August 2015) saying "Adding more cards is going to make it harder and harder for new players" and that "This is something we're going to have to figure out how to manage and how to address in the long term. There's no easy answer."

- Ben Brode in an interview with PC Gamer (September 2015) saying "It’s tricky. In order to shake up the meta we have to make powerful, exciting cards, so that players make new decks and try new things. And we want to do that, we want to shake the meta up, but if we just keep making more and more powerful cards over time, it warps a little bit what Hearthstone is. Right now, for 2 mana you get a 3/2 with an upside, but as things keep getting more powerful you get a 3/3 for 2 mana with an upside, and so it’s scary that we have to either shake up the meta up by making more powerful cards, or make cards people aren’t excited about. A way to handle that that we’re currently looking at is what we call ‘sideways design’, where instead of making cards that are just better, we make cards that are situationally better. If you use this card you have to use dragons, and if you use this card, you have to use mechs—but it doesn’t just increase the overall power. We can only do that for so long though, and we’re looking at other ways that we can solve this core problem of continually adding cards to the game. But yes, sideways design is a way we can mitigate that somewhat."

Maybe this is why I'm not surprised, or particularly understanding of why people feel like things were going to be perpetually playable in all formats. They weren't even trying to be subtle, it was already public knowledge they were looking at doing this and the three articles I posted were basically the first three I found on it (I remember a blue post regarding it as well, but honestly me digging through months and months of blue posts is not going to prove my point any more or less). I feel for the players who legitimately don't follow Hearthpwn/Reddit/etc, who only got notice after they managed to get the "New Way To Play" banner onto mobile; I feel for the guys/girls that just started the game and crafted Boom right before the announcement happened, because it may not have been what they really wanted to devote resources to if it was going to be relegated to Wild.

The people complaining hardest in this thread are not those players, and they're not new to the community. They commonly view one of the biggest outlets of Hearthstone news you can find (which is known for prominently displaying interviews with the Devs), and they've got the nerve to argue Wild not giving HWC points makes it too "uncompetitive" for their taste. On top of that the amount of smug self-satisfaction about being "smarter" than the number of people who have had the patience to discuss alternate points of view on a topic that's subjective, while you present little to no factual evidence to back up any claims, is why whatever bit of sympathy I had for your plight has basically just turned into pure schadenfreude regarding the future of your collection.

I'm a big proponent of speaking with your wallet and spending your money on what you feel is going to provide you with adequate entertainment value, so for those leaving the game due to the changes I wish you the best. Hopefully in the future you can find something that disappoints you less.

Standard is good for changing the meta every time a rotation happen and let new players in but thats just it, they may feel less overwhelmed at the start but in the long run like everyone else will feel overwhelmed due to losing core cards every rotation and 2 expansions back to back. The price barrier is higher than ever with this measures and in the long run it will be proven to be true.

The other bad aspect of standard is the shadow that will cast on wild one of the most potential mode in the long run due to the big amount of card pool. What pisses me the most is their unwillily stance of nerfing problematic overused cards that could help wild in the long run to be a more healthy enviroment for those who wish wild is they way to play. The game is big enough for both modes to prosper so i really dont understand the neccesity to give a death sentence to a mode that could be awesome.

TL:DL Releasing standard is no escuse to neglet wild format to oblivion, They could easly balance both formats every year by nerfing problematic cards without interfering with standard.

I don't disagree Standard isn't fixing every single barrier of entry for new players, but I do think it makes it better (at least as long as they maintain some kind of core sets like they are with Basic/Classic); 2 expansions per year though will add a definite surge in the card pool that as of now we haven't really had a chance to see, Adventures have been nice in the sense that for actual money they were always really solid purchases to suggest to people (though I think from a f2p standpoint in a lot of ways expansions have had their upsides as well, especially since you'll be able to get the cards from playing Arena). I think overall even with the worst case scenario of a player leaving long enough to have a significant portion of their collection rotated out though, it will ultimately be easier to jump back into the game because odds are at least some portion of your collection at any one time is going to have top tier cards. Only time will really tell how it will pan out, and see how much good/bad this does for the growth of the game. One way or another though, this seems like a reasonable alternative to try instead of "Okay you want to play? Buy X wings of Naxx/BRM/LoE/2016 Adventure, and craft X relevant cards from GvG/TGT/Both 2016 expansions.", which is already looking like a very daunting caveat to introduce people to the game with. The other way is to just phase sets out by making the cards in them worse than new cards, but that kills entire sets off for viability in eternal formats. I imagine Boom will be replaced as the best 7 drop by a future 7 drop, but I'd rather it be a Troggzor/Boom kind of decision than have it be "Summon THREE Boom Bots".

In regards to Standard casting a shadow on Wild, I really don't feel like Blizzard is lying when they say they want it to be awesome even if it's not the format they choose for the HWC Tour this year. How will balancing pan out? That's hard to say, but Brode had a tweet a day or two ago explicitly stating that the power level of Wild was going to simply be higher than Standard; I don't think it's the power level people are imagining it's going to be (pre-nerf Patron is maybe the strongest I could see), but it will simply be a format that eventually will be where people go to play crazy strong decks against crazy strong decks. I'm in the camp that wants to see that, which means leaving cards at their raw power until something becomes truly oppressive. It isn't neglect to cater that format specifically to players who want to build insanely powerful decks out of all the cards available, it's an aspect they want to have that differentiates Standard from Wild significantly.

Balancing a card game is never going to be easy, because of any of the copy-and-paste reasons listed a million times before (where bad cards need to exist for multiple reasons, and will always exist); I'd rather just see them treat it like a physical TCG and give us new cards while spot-adjusting either particularly bad cards (see: Bane of Doom buff) on occasion . There are always going to be a subset of "best" cards in any format with the majority being unused, which short periods between balancing and rebalancing isn't going to really ever fix properly. They should fix cards for the long term imo, not because they just happen to be the best card for that slot.

 

Quote from GralQ >>

Quote from raochu >>

LOL is everyone still arguing?

I wonder if anyone has changed their minds on this...

just agree to disagree, let this thread die already

 I think it means that there is geniunely a lot of unhappy players with this move. We hope blizzard implements something that relieves our loss a lot, so that's the urgency to come here and express the concern.

A reduced set of users come here to insult us though, i dont know what they profit from it. But that's good to keep this as the most growing thread in hearthpwn so we thank them

Points are standing, we dont want blizzard to scam us

Quote from Giorgioksk >>

Quote from Tze >>

Quote from zezetoni >>

Quote from Tze >>

So I looked it up and as early as May of last year Blizzard was already telling people in interviews that they were going to have to establish a solution down the road and that after awhile sheer card quantity with the current design was going to be prohibitive to new players. For those arguing there was no foreshadowing you have:

- Eric Dodds in an interview with Gamesradar (May 2015) saying "One of those issues does surround the adding of new cards, because we know we can’t just keep adding cards forever. It’s important to figure out solutions to that kind of thing".

- Hamilton Chu in an interview with GameSpot (August 2015) saying "Adding more cards is going to make it harder and harder for new players" and that "This is something we're going to have to figure out how to manage and how to address in the long term. There's no easy answer."

- Ben Brode in an interview with PC Gamer (September 2015) saying "It’s tricky. In order to shake up the meta we have to make powerful, exciting cards, so that players make new decks and try new things. And we want to do that, we want to shake the meta up, but if we just keep making more and more powerful cards over time, it warps a little bit what Hearthstone is. Right now, for 2 mana you get a 3/2 with an upside, but as things keep getting more powerful you get a 3/3 for 2 mana with an upside, and so it’s scary that we have to either shake up the meta up by making more powerful cards, or make cards people aren’t excited about. A way to handle that that we’re currently looking at is what we call ‘sideways design’, where instead of making cards that are just better, we make cards that are situationally better. If you use this card you have to use dragons, and if you use this card, you have to use mechs—but it doesn’t just increase the overall power. We can only do that for so long though, and we’re looking at other ways that we can solve this core problem of continually adding cards to the game. But yes, sideways design is a way we can mitigate that somewhat."

Maybe this is why I'm not surprised, or particularly understanding of why people feel like things were going to be perpetually playable in all formats. They weren't even trying to be subtle, it was already public knowledge they were looking at doing this and the three articles I posted were basically the first three I found on it (I remember a blue post regarding it as well, but honestly me digging through months and months of blue posts is not going to prove my point any more or less). I feel for the players who legitimately don't follow Hearthpwn/Reddit/etc, who only got notice after they managed to get the "New Way To Play" banner onto mobile; I feel for the guys/girls that just started the game and crafted Boom right before the announcement happened, because it may not have been what they really wanted to devote resources to if it was going to be relegated to Wild.

The people complaining hardest in this thread are not those players, and they're not new to the community. They commonly view one of the biggest outlets of Hearthstone news you can find (which is known for prominently displaying interviews with the Devs), and they've got the nerve to argue Wild not giving HWC points makes it too "uncompetitive" for their taste. On top of that the amount of smug self-satisfaction about being "smarter" than the number of people who have had the patience to discuss alternate points of view on a topic that's subjective, while you present little to no factual evidence to back up any claims, is why whatever bit of sympathy I had for your plight has basically just turned into pure schadenfreude regarding the future of your collection.

I'm a big proponent of speaking with your wallet and spending your money on what you feel is going to provide you with adequate entertainment value, so for those leaving the game due to the changes I wish you the best. Hopefully in the future you can find something that disappoints you less.

Standard is good for changing the meta every time a rotation happen and let new players in but thats just it, they may feel less overwhelmed at the start but in the long run like everyone else will feel overwhelmed due to losing core cards every rotation and 2 expansions back to back. The price barrier is higher than ever with this measures and in the long run it will be proven to be true.

The other bad aspect of standard is the shadow that will cast on wild one of the most potential mode in the long run due to the big amount of card pool. What pisses me the most is their unwillily stance of nerfing problematic overused cards that could help wild in the long run to be a more healthy enviroment for those who wish wild is they way to play. The game is big enough for both modes to prosper so i really dont understand the neccesity to give a death sentence to a mode that could be awesome.

TL:DL Releasing standard is no escuse to neglet wild format to oblivion, They could easly balance both formats every year by nerfing problematic cards without interfering with standard.

I don't disagree Standard isn't fixing every single barrier of entry for new players, but I do think it makes it better (at least as long as they maintain some kind of core sets like they are with Basic/Classic); 2 expansions per year though will add a definite surge in the card pool that as of now we haven't really had a chance to see, Adventures have been nice in the sense that for actual money they were always really solid purchases to suggest to people (though I think from a f2p standpoint in a lot of ways expansions have had their upsides as well, especially since you'll be able to get the cards from playing Arena). I think overall even with the worst case scenario of a player leaving long enough to have a significant portion of their collection rotated out though, it will ultimately be easier to jump back into the game because odds are at least some portion of your collection at any one time is going to have top tier cards. Only time will really tell how it will pan out, and see how much good/bad this does for the growth of the game. One way or another though, this seems like a reasonable alternative to try instead of "Okay you want to play? Buy X wings of Naxx/BRM/LoE/2016 Adventure, and craft X relevant cards from GvG/TGT/Both 2016 expansions.", which is already looking like a very daunting caveat to introduce people to the game with. The other way is to just phase sets out by making the cards in them worse than new cards, but that kills entire sets off for viability in eternal formats. I imagine Boom will be replaced as the best 7 drop by a future 7 drop, but I'd rather it be a Troggzor/Boom kind of decision than have it be "Summon THREE Boom Bots".

In regards to Standard casting a shadow on Wild, I really don't feel like Blizzard is lying when they say they want it to be awesome even if it's not the format they choose for the HWC Tour this year. How will balancing pan out? That's hard to say, but Brode had a tweet a day or two ago explicitly stating that the power level of Wild was going to simply be higher than Standard; I don't think it's the power level people are imagining it's going to be (pre-nerf Patron is maybe the strongest I could see), but it will simply be a format that eventually will be where people go to play crazy strong decks against crazy strong decks. I'm in the camp that wants to see that, which means leaving cards at their raw power until something becomes truly oppressive. It isn't neglect to cater that format specifically to players who want to build insanely powerful decks out of all the cards available, it's an aspect they want to have that differentiates Standard from Wild significantly.

Balancing a card game is never going to be easy, because of any of the copy-and-paste reasons listed a million times before (where bad cards need to exist for multiple reasons, and will always exist); I'd rather just see them treat it like a physical TCG and give us new cards while spot-adjusting either particularly bad cards (see: Bane of Doom buff) on occasion . There are always going to be a subset of "best" cards in any format with the majority being unused, which short periods between balancing and rebalancing isn't going to really ever fix properly. They should fix cards for the long term imo, not because they just happen to be the best card for that slot.

 

 God damn, you guyz must learn how to use spoiler... (or skype :P)

You're being absolutely ridiculous and sound like a child having a tantrum. I honestly have no clue why you are so outraged over this. The change is fine, get over it.

I mean I was pissed off when Planters got rid of Cheez Balls.  Those things were awesome.  Did they warn me? nope.  To this day, I won't buy anything they sell, not a thing.  I guess other people must because they are still around.  It's almost like these businesses just consider what makes them the most money even if they lose some customers, even loyal ones, over it.   Some call it crazy some call it Capitalism.