FYI, yugio basically does what the post is suggesting. That game does not have formats because they do focused banning on only OP cards.
Anyway, people can have different opinions. It's ot like you are stupid or ruining the game if you like cycles. How exactly are MTG players ruining this game? As far as I know they don't design anything. That doesn't even make sense.
That's the other part though, As a veteran YGO player, isn't Yugioh is largely what we don't want? We don't want another game where they print cards just to ban them, right? We don't want another game where each set has to be stronger than the last, right? How they have to divide the game into tribes just to try to force some diversity (although we already have that with classes)?
For those who don't play, Magispecters are whole set of hexproof cards that can't be killed or targeted by card effects, are able to be resummoned whenever they do die, have excellent spot removal and searching options... yet a deck that can do all that still isn't even top 5! In 2014 Artifacts could be set as backrow and made you have to PANIC about using backrow destruction because you could have almost your entire board destroyed before worrying about playing into traps, and were the bane of peoples' existences before the next set dropped and they COMPLETELY fell off the map when Alliance revealed four new meta decks in one set, all of which had incredible recovery or simply replaced themselves when they died... Now they had to create Pendulums which often search something when they die on top of being able to be summoned again, so attacking over something would give your opponent MORE resources... because they had to create something more powerful so the new sets would sell (on top of the banlist)... All because of no set rotation.
It works for Yugi though, because it's a game based on "You're free to do whatever you want! No summoning sickness or mana costs or restrictions at all! Outside of one measly normal summon go have a ball!!!"
Hearthstone did the opposite. They print Deathrattles, then Mechs, then Dragons, then Inspire and Joust, and they wonder why we don't use these other mechanics...
Here we are with cards like Boom and Knife Juggler that we scream about. I personally like Dr. Boom, many players don't "hate" the card so much (although everyone is kinda tired of it) so it being ban-worthy is subjective, plus we know Blizzard does NOT like nerfs and probably wouldn't want to have a banlist. Who's to say if a card is banworthy? I despise Savage Roar but many players would strangle me reading that. I love Shaman and wish it was more consistent, but also realize that "Complete balance" means "Every match is a coin flip" which isn't the solution, either.
I really should create a separate personal thread for these, making a lot of posts like this -_-
Definitely in agreement with the opinion that a "Core Set" would be preferable to fixing Classic as the eternal set. That's actually the set we're at risk of "losing" since the nerfs could cause some things to be gone from the game forever, rather than pushed into Wild. Nerf Giants, Alexstraza, Combo, BGH, and they'll never exist in their current form again.
Never played MTG, but I've played games without rotation. The alternatives are power creep, growing complexity, and an overwhelming card pool. It's enjoyable for those who crave complexity, have a strong loyalty to the game, and are willing to continually invest. It also shuts out new players, leading to an inevitable erosion of the player base. It would be horrible for Hearthstone. The game is simplistic at its core, and heavy rules additions / complexity to open up design options make little sense. If "re-prints" are an issue, try power creep - not even a chance to play the old card in a different format, since it's inferior in the only format. At least there's the option to utilize the older cards in Wild, and those who are worried about continually growing investment at least have the option to play Standard and receive a discount to keep up with the game by dusting rotated out sets.
every 2 weeks a patch comes out where u get new content and balace changes... because of those balance changes champions get weaker and stronger
the pros and cons are
pros:
- the game is always changing so even without something being buffed, a champ can become good because he counters another champ. which makes the game always feel fresh
cons:
- some champs are not strong enough or suit the current meta so they are not played, and if you really like a champ that is way too nerfed or it doesnt fit the meta, you might not play him for a long time for untill something changes
now i know you cant really compare a moba and a card game but if you switch the word champ with deck you will read the whole thing diffrently... it seems to me that blizzard isnt giving hearthstone enough resouces or they are just lazy to put some people in the balance department
every 2 weeks a patch comes out where u get new content and balace changes... because of those balance changes champions get weaker and stronger
the pros and cons are
pros:
- the game is always changing so even without something being buffed, a champ can become good because he counters another champ. which makes the game always feel fresh
cons:
- some champs are not strong enough or suit the current meta so they are not played, and if you really like a champ that is way too nerfed or it doesnt fit the meta, you might not play him for a long time for untill something changes
now i know you cant really compare a moba and a card game but if you switch the word champ with deck you will read the whole thing diffrently... it seems to me that blizzard isnt giving hearthstone enough resouces or they are just lazy to put some people in the balance department
The game was ok last patch but since 6.3 you need to ban like 10 champions every game and you get 6 bans.. And control 3 of them..
Rotations happen in every card game everywhere, and they're not getting rid of anything. They'll still have Wild mode.
"It's not like they took your cards away, they just threw them in the Sewers!"
Also rotation happens in every PHYSICAL card game because of the impossibility of retroactively fixing cards, which isn't a problem with hearthstone. But good job parroting those two phrases like everyone else.
When you dump something down the toilet it disappears while still existing in the sewers. Welcome to Wild mode, "it's not like they took our cards away".
Yeah why remove a card why you can just force it into a subpar, uncared for, unbalanced and super-casual format? They really are good at fucking over their players in a way that some will actually defend them.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
When you dump something down the toilet it disappears while still existing in the sewers. Welcome to Wild mode, "it's not like they took our cards away".
Who said anything about Wild being "subpar and uncared for"? It'll be competitive if there's a ladder for it.
Besides, if Face Hunter/Shaman wind up dominating Standard and Secret Pally and Zoo are still wrecking in Wild, pretty sure most of us will have a lot more fun playing Wild mode, right?
not really in MTG you have core sets which come out each year which have the colour staples , all blizzard are doing by not removing Basic and classic is effectivley the same but without making reprints of old cards in new sets.
and i really dont understand why people are getting so upset of the new format, u dont have to play it you can still climb ladder in wild and face nothing but mech mage and secret paladin if you really want to.
but with standard it opens up the design space for blizzard in a big way because they dont have to compete with cards like shredder which effects both the 4 and the 2 drop slots going forward and ofc Dr. Boom without having to power creep,
Standard is just a button you press when you want to play a game just like Arena or Wild if you dont like a format dont play it
Ah the good ol Mtg does it argument. A good opportunity to use the ctrl+v option:
Since all the people are constantly repeating the mantra of "there was no other way", "MTG does it so it must be gods will" and other bullshit over and over again without actually using their brain I am going to make a list now that I can copy paste all over, to save time:
This game is not MTG. Mtg does Standard mode, since it is a PHYSICAL CARDGAME. There you cant buff/nerf cards easily. So it makes sense to do this in MTG but not HS that is DIGITAL ONLY!
Instead of Standard mode we could have monthly buffs and nerfs. Since this is a DIGITAL card game, blizzard could have solved a lot of MTGs problems by simply BUFFING and NERFING cards. But instead they went the "basically ban" route from the beginning (I mean Warsong Commander might as well say: can not be played now) So we don't even know how this game might look like if there was someone in chargethat can do slight stat adjustment on a regular basis.
ALL HS expansions so far are intertwined and cant be simply ripped out without leaving an unplayable mess. All I need to say is Gorillabot A-3. There is no point in getting rid of 2 expansions when EVERY SINGLE expansion has been made to synergize with the previous and next ones. Expansions would have needed to be made in a way so that they are enclosed in themselves so they don't invalidate the next expansion if they leave rotation.
There are plenty of ways Standard could have been implemented differently. They could only ban certain cards and not entire sets. Or ban sets but convert key cards that are important to basic set. Or they could throw all now important cards into a new "basic" set which then would be the set that stays for ever.
Wild mode will not be balanced, watched or played. It is basically a bigger brawl mode. Right after release people will still play wildmode but after a few expansions there will be more and more people that dont have ALL the cards, so wild will become a no go area. Just like Deck construction brawls are unplayable now for new players if they require some really aweful niche card that no one ever uses.
Standard will also be the only mode that is allowed for tournaments, gives points or is displayed to your friends etc. So much for "we care for both modes". No, Wild is clearly second typ citizen and will be treated as such.
If a new player wants to play Naxxramas encounters he can no longer buy them... and subsequently there is no guarantee that blizzard will allow players that already own Naxx to play them for ever or if shut it down to save server capacity.
People may refer to a "rotation" but infact your cards are GONE. Maybe in the future you will get a 3/3 mech that restores 8 to your hero again... doesn't mean that you can use healbot though. You will have to buy a SECOND healbot and play with that one instead. But in wild you now an have an ultra heal deck with 4 healbots. But I guess that is not a "1-2 turn kill combo" so blizzard doesn't give a shit about balancing something like that.
Balancing as a whole will probably cease to exist (even more than currently). Why would Blizzard bother to nerf cards now? Not only in wild but in standard? They just need to WAIT a year and they are gone anyway. That is about the time frame Blizzard takes to nerf stuff anyway, if ever. So did you enjoy waiting 8 months for Undertaker nerf? Have fun with stuff like that x10.
Arena is going to stay unbalanced as ever. They cant even be arsed to balance wild. So why would they ever bother with card rarities or class balance in this mode? Just Paladin and mage forever. Not to mention that broken combos that can occure in wild might even be worse in Arena (Murloc Knight and Kvaldir Raider are cards that on their own win games in arena for example).
Finally If you want to compare this game so badly with other games, then how about League of Legends instead? Both are F2p,in both you collect something (champions/cards), both are probably biggest of their genre and mostly they are both DIGITAL. So what would be if LoL were to ban all older champions form ranked solo Q? You cant play with all your champions you bought skins (golden cards) for competitively any more. But I guess you can play twisted treeline if you are a masochist. But even then you cant really play for long, since the new champions from the new set are not balanced to be beaten with your old ones, so you can't really play there either. Suddenly Standard does sound kinda like a scam doesn't it? Unlike HS, LoL does balance and update older champions, game mechanics, runes, talents, basically EVERYTHING in the game. Don't you think that blizzard could do some buffs end nerfs instead of just banning everything.
So if people please could give some actual good arguments for standards as opposed to copy pasting the same "but but MAGIC does it" over and over again, that would be nice.
This is going to be fun
1. You are correct, Magic is physical, Hearthstone is digital
2. Monthly nerfs and buffs - Blizzard has stated repeatedly they hate changing cards. Literally each time it happens, they say they don't like it. But moving on from what Blizzard does and doesn't like, theres another thing to look at - and that is what is coming down the pipeline. For example, if Blizzard had looked at the game last July, and been like 'no one plays paladins secrets, we should buff them' and subsequently came out with Mysterious Challenger, it would be even more broken. Then, you'd have exactly one month to pinpoint which cards are the biggest problem, and how to nerf them.
Now lets look at Warsong Commander. This is a card that had already been nerfed in beta, and was now causing problems again. People pointed to the Berserkers, Patrons, and Commander as the problem. Others just said the deck as a whole was bad. Blizzard killed Warsong Commander, but notice, the Patron deck still lives on in a different form, and cards like Dreadsteed (initially intended to be a neutral Naxx card) no longer have to be delayed due to a completely different card. Nerfing is not as easy as it seems to this community.
3. This is the case for certain tribe minions, but not all. This is more of a tribe by tribe basis - mechs are highly synergistic similar to Murlocs, while beasts and demons can escape by losing a few cards. The Gorilla bot isn't unplayable, but it is not nearly as optimal as it may have been. This is the same thing that would've happened if cards had been nerfed a month after release (people screamed about mech mage when it came out, if they had nerfed it, then Gorilla bot came out, it would've been dead on arrival)
4. On this point you must think from a few different perspectives. First think of the new player, who jumps into the game, and sees 2 modes, Wild and Standard. Wild mode says you can play anything in the game, Standard says you can play anything besides a list of cards. A list that would only get longer as expansions rolled out. Imagine that list simply from the start of hearthstone, including unleash, undertaker, gadgetzan, boom, shredder, mad scientist, sludge belcher, loatheb, challenger, patron, commander. As a new player, you don't understand what any of this is, and it gets overwhelming. So you stop playing.
Or, if you threw important cards into a new basic set.... what cards are good enough to go in there? Ice Rager? Cogmaster and Mechwarper? Does the set continuously grow each time something is rotated out?
5. The thing here is that, that's not always true. Unfortunately unless you have a time machine, you can't back up this point. Some people may see a kickass deck they wanna try, and they will. Decks like Oil Rogue, Mech Mage, are very common heavy, with only a few legendaries, and are competitive to a degree. And in this sense, older players who do enjoy those decks, can go play them. If the cards had simply been nerfed, they would never be able to play these decks ever again (RIP Miracle).
As for Tournaments, wild tournaments -will- happen. Organizers are still experimenting with other formats. There was a team draft match earlier this month, a place near me did a 'standard' tournament already, and there is a weekly Tavern Brawl one somewhere on the web. Wild will be done just as much as those, but it will not be the dominant one.
6. Standard is only allowed to give points to the WCS. This only affects a small .01% of players for the most part, as a majority of Hearthstone players will never make it to that point in the game. It really isn't as big of a deal in the amount wild gets played.
As for displaying to your friends, this is the only point I can really say I agree with, it would be a nice toggle to display either, with a W or S as an indicator.
7. Blizzard has said they may use Naxx in the future, they just do not have definite plans. I would recommend Ben Brodes video on announcing features, as they could be planning something that they're just not 100% on yet. And they won't take away players ability to play them if they do own them, because Naxx is not set up on individual servers than other game modes. They are all hosted on a conglomerate of servers, taking Naxx out wouldn't affect server load, especially because theres likely only a few people doing it at any given time as is.
8. Again, this cannot be proved without a time machine. Blizzard has stated that they have yet to determine the affects of reprints. It is possible the situation you described arrives. It is more likely, (especially if Blizzard takes from magic in this regard), when a card gets reprinted in a set, you will be able to use that card again in standard, it will just have an updated watermark detailing the newer set. Nothing is GONE.
9. This goes back to the design philosophy of not wanting to nerf cards. And this isn't laziness mind you, it's easier to Warsong Commander nerf a card each time people complain than to actually have to sit through the constant criticism. But a metagame is an organic thing, take a look at Tempostorm week after week for a solid example. Remeber when LoE came out, and Renolock was the big thing? Then Secret Paladin and Druid rose back to the top? Suddenly Patron and Zoo where good again too, and of course Renolock does well against both those decks? Nerfing a card interrupts that flow, the cycle of decks in and out of the top of the metagame. If you try to 'balance' something, instead something else just rises to the top. A better way to balance is to introduce new tools to deal with a problem. They brought in Chillmaw and Twilight Guardian in the wake of patron, and added a deck that stood a chance to it.
10. There is a quote out there where they mentioned doing expansion specific Arena stuff. This again goes into the 'planned but not announced' catagory - fix ranked mode first then Arena. And to retierate, balance by introducing cards is better than nerfing. Newer sets make murloc knights and raiders less common.
11. The thing is Hearthstone is not a MOBA. We can compare it to Dota or LOL, sure, but that is like comparing tacos to a fine plate of spaghetti. They're both food, yes, but they are different types intended for different occasions and people. And just because I put lettuce on tacos does not mean my sphagetti needs it. As is, your comparison is flawed as is. Your say "what if Lol banned all older champions from ranked solo Q" when it should be "What if Lol added another solo Q where older champions are not allowed".
Even better, people will continuously say Wild will be an unbalanced mess... and cards like Dr. Boom will run ramapant. But if Blizzard is cycling Dr. Boom, there will need to be other big minions, and if there are other big minions, Blizzard will need to give players ways to deal with them. And those ways can be used on Dr. Boom. So no, Standard doesn't sound like a scam, it sounds like a different way to play for different people.
People compare Hearthstone to Magic because they are the two biggest card games in a physical and digital sense. Both are wildly successful, and both are looking to continue their success, so copying parts of Magic into Hearthstone, and visa versa should be met with intrigue, not hostility. Is every part of one game going to work in another? No, but cautious optimism is better and more healthy than expecting to be scammed out of money, and blaming magic players for 'ruining their game'.
The problem with nerfing cards is that they either nerf it so that it still sees play, which causes a new expansion have less of an impact, which makes the meta feel stale and boring after a while, or then they nerf it so that it's unplayable, so a new expansion does have an impact in the game, but the card is unplayable and there isn't even a wild mode to use the old version at. Alternately, they can do powercreep, but I think people wouldnt like that much. Formats make a new expansion matter while not killing the card with nerfs. Nerfing would also affect arena, while formats currently do not. If blizzard were to release an epic or legendary card that has crazy synergy with some good for arena common card warrior has and if they were to nerf the common card to avoid it being broken, warrior would become weaker in arena.
Ah the good ol Mtg does it argument. A good opportunity to use the ctrl+v option:
Since all the people are constantly repeating the mantra of "there was no other way", "MTG does it so it must be gods will" and other bullshit over and over again without actually using their brain I am going to make a list now that I can copy paste all over, to save time:
[snip]
So if people please could give some actual good arguments for standards as opposed to copy pasting the same "but but MAGIC does it" over and over again, that would be nice.
The arguments have been set forth numerous times. There are three essential reasons why Blizzard is implementing the changes it has announced.
First, reduce the barriers of entry for new players. If things remained as they are then in ten years a new player might have to slog through 10-20 adventures to accumulate certain "essential" cards. Some may say "Sure but Blizzard could allow cards from adventures to be crafted after a certain amount of time." But this is an imperfect solution. Older players could complain that newer players are getting preferential treatment and Blizzard could be concerned players will just wait to craft cards rather than consume adventure content. Also, the barriers to entry would relate to a later point concerning power creep. As the card set matures, more and more basic and core cards would get replaced by superior cards from adventures and new sets. The fewer basic and core cards that appear in play make decks composed from them less and less viable. New players would have a longer path to travel before they could field a competitive deck.
Second, reduce the prevalence of power creep. This topic has been well-trodden so I go through a detailed explanation of it again. Suffice to say, when Blizzard produces new cards, either by adventure or new card sets, they want to ensure at some some of the new cards will be appealing to players. While producing novel mechanics but with a similar power to existing cards is the ideal solution, there are limits to this and a tendency (i.e., the "lazy solution") to just produce a superior card to other cards at a particular mana slot. By limiting the universe of cards available in Standard play, there are less cards for new content to compete with and less likelihood that the lazy solution will be adopted.
Third, promote card design freedom. Designing cards is difficult in general. Developers have to consider every possible interaction to ensure no problematic game-breaking interactions might arise by introducing new cards and new mechanics. As the game matures and literally thousands of cards have been released, this task of ensuring no game-breaking interactions occur becomes more and more daunting. We don't want Blizzard to constantly be either nerfing existing cards to allow new cards to be released or not releasing cool new cards and mechanics because of the problematic interactions they might have with existing cards. By limiting the card set for Standard going forward, that mode is more manageable. The "Wild" mode, as it has been termed, has that name because the tolerance for powerful interactions will be relaxed in that mode. If anything Wild will be more of a challenge as Blizzard will need to ensure that a few powerful interactions don't exist that make Wild gameplay very monotonous. If a problematic interaction arises because of an interaction with a card no longer available in Standard play and a card available in Standard play then we can expect the former will be modified to eliminate the problematic interaction.
So nobody have successfully taken up my challenge. Balance Naxx and GvG in such a way that most of TGT becomes viable, without killing (or severely reducing the appearance of) Naxx and GvG. If you argue nerfs are the way the go, here is your chance to prove it. If you argue that nerfs are the way to go, this is the first thing that needs to be done.
So your solution is to delete cards entirely.... Thank god you don't work at Blizzard.
At least this way we have a different mode to use the cards in
TGT was a great expansion if GvG/BRM didn't exist. Not just poisoned blade, that will always suck, but cards like gagetzan jouster, may see play instead of chow, for one example
1) Hearthstone makes money, and keeps interest, by releasing new sets. One could imagine a model where the game could survive without selling new sets, but they did not follow that model. Complaining that "it's a digital game" misses the point - it is exceedingly unlikely that they will radically change the monetization strategy for an already successful game.
2) The other component of the money making model is collection building. If they buff and nerf cards at a high frequency, there is no point in collecting particular cards, since they will randomly transmute into something else in the next patch. They would have to abandon the collection model, and make all the customers who spent time and money building collections angry (in other words, their entire customer base).
3) The only plausible way of selling those new sets is either by direct power creep, which means that the game will evolve into 3 turn games, or via having a "restricted" format which remains at a stable power level. However, if people cannot play their old cards, they will get mad. Hence there will be "Wild" and the restricted format (Standard).
4) The only way to shake up the meta in the "restricted" format is to get rid of a lot of cards. They could either create a big ban list, or rotate sets. However, a big ban list that rotates quickly does not help new players - they will need to have large collections to keep up with the rotating bans. Also, a big ban list makes crafting decisions hard, as you do not know how long your *deck* stays in the meta. If you craft Secret Paladin (boo!), if they nerf MC and give a dust refund for him, that does not help you for all the now useless secrets you crafted. With a calendar-based rotation, you know how long a card will remain in Standard (modulo emergency bans or nerfs).
I expected a hybrid system between a set rotation and a ban list; difficult to implement in a physical game, but feasible for a video game. However, it would be far more complex to explain to new players. The complexity issue is almost certainly why they chose the Standard model.
Magic is a physical hard to pay to win game where the average player spends hundreds if not thousands of dollars. Hearthstone is a digital free to play game where the average player doesn't spend a cent.
Magic is a physical hard to pay to win game where the average player spends hundreds if not thousands of dollars. Hearthstone is a digital free to play game where the average player doesn't spend a cent.
They are not comparable.
Of course they are comparable. Just like it's comparable to every other card game physical or digital. If you wanna still play HS in 5-10 years time then you would see that having a Standard format is necessary for it's long term success.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
We don't want another game where they print cards just to ban them, right? We don't want another game where each set has to be stronger than the last, right? How they have to divide the game into tribes just to try to force some diversity (although we already have that with classes)?
For those who don't play, Magispecters are whole set of hexproof cards that can't be killed or targeted by card effects, are able to be resummoned whenever they do die, have excellent spot removal and searching options... yet a deck that can do all that still isn't even top 5! In 2014 Artifacts could be set as backrow and made you have to PANIC about using backrow destruction because you could have almost your entire board destroyed before worrying about playing into traps, and were the bane of peoples' existences before the next set dropped and they COMPLETELY fell off the map when Alliance revealed four new meta decks in one set, all of which had incredible recovery or simply replaced themselves when they died... Now they had to create Pendulums which often search something when they die on top of being able to be summoned again, so attacking over something would give your opponent MORE resources... because they had to create something more powerful so the new sets would sell (on top of the banlist)... All because of no set rotation.
It works for Yugi though, because it's a game based on "You're free to do whatever you want! No summoning sickness or mana costs or restrictions at all! Outside of one measly normal summon go have a ball!!!"
Hearthstone did the opposite. They print Deathrattles, then Mechs, then Dragons, then Inspire and Joust, and they wonder why we don't use these other mechanics...
Here we are with cards like Boom and Knife Juggler that we scream about. I personally like Dr. Boom, many players don't "hate" the card so much (although everyone is kinda tired of it) so it being ban-worthy is subjective, plus we know Blizzard does NOT like nerfs and probably wouldn't want to have a banlist. Who's to say if a card is banworthy? I despise Savage Roar but many players would strangle me reading that. I love Shaman and wish it was more consistent, but also realize that "Complete balance" means "Every match is a coin flip" which isn't the solution, either.
I really should create a separate personal thread for these, making a lot of posts like this -_-
Definitely in agreement with the opinion that a "Core Set" would be preferable to fixing Classic as the eternal set. That's actually the set we're at risk of "losing" since the nerfs could cause some things to be gone from the game forever, rather than pushed into Wild. Nerf Giants, Alexstraza, Combo, BGH, and they'll never exist in their current form again.
Never played MTG, but I've played games without rotation. The alternatives are power creep, growing complexity, and an overwhelming card pool. It's enjoyable for those who crave complexity, have a strong loyalty to the game, and are willing to continually invest. It also shuts out new players, leading to an inevitable erosion of the player base. It would be horrible for Hearthstone. The game is simplistic at its core, and heavy rules additions / complexity to open up design options make little sense. If "re-prints" are an issue, try power creep - not even a chance to play the old card in a different format, since it's inferior in the only format. At least there's the option to utilize the older cards in Wild, and those who are worried about continually growing investment at least have the option to play Standard and receive a discount to keep up with the game by dusting rotated out sets.
CCGing since '98.
look at lol for example
every 2 weeks a patch comes out where u get new content and balace changes... because of those balance changes champions get weaker and stronger
the pros and cons are
pros:
- the game is always changing so even without something being buffed, a champ can become good because he counters another champ. which makes the game always feel fresh
cons:
- some champs are not strong enough or suit the current meta so they are not played, and if you really like a champ that is way too nerfed or it doesnt fit the meta, you might not play him for a long time for untill something changes
now i know you cant really compare a moba and a card game but if you switch the word champ with deck you will read the whole thing diffrently... it seems to me that blizzard isnt giving hearthstone enough resouces or they are just lazy to put some people in the balance department
Rotations happen in every card game everywhere, and they're not getting rid of anything. They'll still have Wild mode.
When you dump something down the toilet it disappears while still existing in the sewers. Welcome to Wild mode, "it's not like they took our cards away".
When you dump something down the toilet it disappears while still existing in the sewers. Welcome to Wild mode, "it's not like they took our cards away".
Who said anything about Wild being "subpar and uncared for"? It'll be competitive if there's a ladder for it.
Besides, if Face Hunter/Shaman wind up dominating Standard and Secret Pally and Zoo are still wrecking in Wild, pretty sure most of us will have a lot more fun playing Wild mode, right?
not really in MTG you have core sets which come out each year which have the colour staples , all blizzard are doing by not removing Basic and classic is effectivley the same but without making reprints of old cards in new sets.
and i really dont understand why people are getting so upset of the new format, u dont have to play it you can still climb ladder in wild and face nothing but mech mage and secret paladin if you really want to.
but with standard it opens up the design space for blizzard in a big way because they dont have to compete with cards like shredder which effects both the 4 and the 2 drop slots going forward and ofc Dr. Boom without having to power creep,
Standard is just a button you press when you want to play a game just like Arena or Wild if you dont like a format dont play it
it is you not understand what i am saying ...
The problem with nerfing cards is that they either nerf it so that it still sees play, which causes a new expansion have less of an impact, which makes the meta feel stale and boring after a while, or then they nerf it so that it's unplayable, so a new expansion does have an impact in the game, but the card is unplayable and there isn't even a wild mode to use the old version at. Alternately, they can do powercreep, but I think people wouldnt like that much. Formats make a new expansion matter while not killing the card with nerfs. Nerfing would also affect arena, while formats currently do not. If blizzard were to release an epic or legendary card that has crazy synergy with some good for arena common card warrior has and if they were to nerf the common card to avoid it being broken, warrior would become weaker in arena.
So nobody have successfully taken up my challenge. Balance Naxx and GvG in such a way that most of TGT becomes viable, without killing (or severely reducing the appearance of) Naxx and GvG. If you argue nerfs are the way the go, here is your chance to prove it. If you argue that nerfs are the way to go, this is the first thing that needs to be done.
People who refuses to play aggro out of principle are even worse than people who play exclusively aggro.
One should seek to become a complete player and play all archetypes, including ones that he despises for whatever irrational reasons.
So your solution is to delete cards entirely.... Thank god you don't work at Blizzard.
At least this way we have a different mode to use the cards in
TGT was a great expansion if GvG/BRM didn't exist. Not just poisoned blade, that will always suck, but cards like gagetzan jouster, may see play instead of chow, for one example
This is how you keep a card game healthy. You would all know that if HS wasn't your first card game. Not being rude - just stating the obvious.
1) Hearthstone makes money, and keeps interest, by releasing new sets. One could imagine a model where the game could survive without selling new sets, but they did not follow that model. Complaining that "it's a digital game" misses the point - it is exceedingly unlikely that they will radically change the monetization strategy for an already successful game.
2) The other component of the money making model is collection building. If they buff and nerf cards at a high frequency, there is no point in collecting particular cards, since they will randomly transmute into something else in the next patch. They would have to abandon the collection model, and make all the customers who spent time and money building collections angry (in other words, their entire customer base).
3) The only plausible way of selling those new sets is either by direct power creep, which means that the game will evolve into 3 turn games, or via having a "restricted" format which remains at a stable power level. However, if people cannot play their old cards, they will get mad. Hence there will be "Wild" and the restricted format (Standard).
4) The only way to shake up the meta in the "restricted" format is to get rid of a lot of cards. They could either create a big ban list, or rotate sets. However, a big ban list that rotates quickly does not help new players - they will need to have large collections to keep up with the rotating bans. Also, a big ban list makes crafting decisions hard, as you do not know how long your *deck* stays in the meta. If you craft Secret Paladin (boo!), if they nerf MC and give a dust refund for him, that does not help you for all the now useless secrets you crafted. With a calendar-based rotation, you know how long a card will remain in Standard (modulo emergency bans or nerfs).
I expected a hybrid system between a set rotation and a ban list; difficult to implement in a physical game, but feasible for a video game. However, it would be far more complex to explain to new players. The complexity issue is almost certainly why they chose the Standard model.
Magic is a physical hard to pay to win game where the average player spends hundreds if not thousands of dollars. Hearthstone is a digital free to play game where the average player doesn't spend a cent.
They are not comparable.