if everyone is playing massively powerful decks and the only way of getting currency in this game is winning then well you have to play decks that win against those massively powerful decks.
basically Hearthstone's way of earning stuff makes it more competitive than your average game, even for players that have more casual goals like crafting a random niche card like Feign Death for a deck they want to play. they have to win a lot to do it, this is not a moba where you get a fair amount of currency even if you lose and it's not a game like starcraft where you have access to all the game from the start.
People want to win. Winning makes people feel good.
If you're playing a card game with friends or just with some local folks, you might be tempted to try and have some more fun with it and try crazy stuff out. When it comes to an online ladder though, your score is what matters most.
I don't understand people that only play standard/ netdecks / competitive decks in hearthstone.
The game being extremely rng & luck-based, is anything but a serious competitive game.
You want to be competitive tryhard pro wannabe? Play starcraft 2 or cs:go, both games ten times harder than hearthstone, no luck in these games.
Play Hearthstone to have fun, wild or standard, but dont always bring "competitive" argument in a non-competitive game please.
You're about 3 years too late on the "Hearthstone shouldn't be treated like a competitive game" crusade If you were here and could somehow get the community to not push the game competitively then you'd be on to something as you'd have blizzard's support on the matter. Instead, we had ex-professionals from MTG and SC who came in here and created fandoms which really enjoyed watching them play against each other. The result is a massive demand for more matches and, eventually, a professional scene.
3 years later, it's FAR too late. HS is now treated as a competitive game. Complaints from the peanut gallery about "a children's card game" means nothing when tournaments pull more viewers than most other e-sports (including CS:GO and SC 2). Thus it's not competitive folks who need to change, but folks who DON'T want a competitive scene to realize what the game has become. RNG and luck doesn't change that as games with massive RNG and luck have also been treated as competitive.
But that's somewhat beside point. The bulk of your post seems to be why is everyone netdecking top tier decks in hearthstone.
The reasons: because they ALWAYS do that. It's not that the game is competitive, or even PvP. GameFAQs built their popularity off of people doing the same mentality to single player games and why a lot of folks bought subscriptions to Nintendo Power.
A large segment of the population plays to win and wants to play efficiently. They ALWAYS will. You only don't notice it when you are playing single player games, playing small niche games, or playing a big game with a small niche community of friends/neighbors.
Thus people netdeck competitive decks for the same people why people used walkthroughs and game guides instead of just 'playing for fun'. Because to them, it IS how they have fun.
It doesn't have to be understood (it can be, if you're willing to do a lot of research on psychology and sociology) but it needs ot be accepted.
Another person that believes games with lots of RNG doesn't have any skill involved and can't be competative . Do I detect a rank 20 player?
Hearthstone has a lot of skill (if also a lot of RNG).
You have decisions about the following:
When to trade, when to face.
Order of cards.
Which card to play in which situation.
When to save or use AoE.
When to play around cards.
When to play around RNG.
How to trade or cast spells to give RNG the best chance at the best outcome.
etc
Yes individual games can be decided by RNG but long term better players will rise to the top and bad players will sink to the bottom.
I'm sure you realise Poker is played competitively and thats an RNG game but thats played extremely competitively for millions of dollars. Hell even an RNGfest like Monopoly is played competitively and even that has skill involved.
And when there is any element of being able to get an edge on your opponent then people will take it. In this case better decks by netdecking from the pros (this actually proves the point that its not all RNG since there are better decks from better players to look at).
If Its all RNG then everyone would just have 50% win rate no mater what, but top 100 pros will have 70%+ win rate with the exact same deck a 40% win rate player at rank 20 might use.
All Collectible Card Games are designed to be an interaction of both strategy and chance. Both elements are at play in any given match of any CCG. As such, CCGs are competitions where you can lose (or win) any particular individual match due to either skill, luck, or some combination of both in various proportions.
A person's skill at a CCG is not decided in a single match versus a single opponent. It is shown in the results of large numbers of matches against large number of opponents. So while luck may indeed decide the outcome of a single match, only a person who has actual skill in the game will have a win percentage of 57% to 60%, while those who have less skill will have win percentages of around 50%.
And yes - part of a player's skill is looking at the game's Metagame, designing a deck based on that metagame, and taking advantage of that knowledge to increase their chances of winning. People who ignore the metagame, or who sniff their noses at "netdecks" are doomed to mediocrity.
Blizzard intended for HS to be competitive, that's why people are talking about competitive HS. Get that through your thick skull, and try to find a grey matter to register that.
I don't understand people that only play standard/ netdecks / competitive decks in hearthstone.
The game being extremely rng & luck-based, is anything but a serious competitive game.
You want to be competitive tryhard pro wannabe? Play starcraft 2 or cs:go, both games ten times harder than hearthstone, no luck in these games.
Play Hearthstone to have fun, wild or standard, but dont always bring "competitive" argument in a non-competitive game please.
If you see the game as a way to relax and have fun, fine by you. There are people who look at this game as a means to compete against each other, fine by them. Having a point of view doesn't make you any better than someone who has the opposite one.
Oh, and good look trying to convince Blizzard to push Hearthstone away from the competitive scene.
Blizzard intended for HS to be competitive, that's why people are talking about competitive HS. Get that through your thick skull, and try to find a grey matter to register that.
No they didn't.
HS originally was meant to be a successor to the Warcraft CCG and was just going to be a small side project. That's why the team was so small and there were not features such as obs mode or a tournament setting originally. They wanted their esports scene to revolve around Starcraft 2 and HotS.
Then HS blew up and they've been playing catchup ever since.
So no, HS wasn't meant to be competitive originally. The community threw a mass of money at them and said "Make this an esport!" and blizzard, unlike some companies, don't tend to ignore armies of fanatics wielding truckfuls of money. So now it is.....ish given that the same community also demanded more Trolden.
I don't understand people that only play standard/ netdecks / competitive decks in hearthstone.
The game being extremely rng & luck-based, is anything but a serious competitive game.
You want to be competitive tryhard pro wannabe? Play starcraft 2 or cs:go, both games ten times harder than hearthstone, no luck in these games.
Play Hearthstone to have fun, wild or standard, but dont always bring "competitive" argument in a non-competitive game please.
This is one of those posts that sounds sensible, until you realize that competing and having fun are not opposites.
But to answer your post in more detail: I often play experimental and fun decks, but it's largely pointless now; the lead competitive decks are simply too powerful, and the game isn't about counterplaying anymore - it's about broken power synergies - it's been reduced to two people playing RNG solitaire.
Actually these so called "competitive" games also have some RNG. For example, a lot of FPS games randomize where you hit in specified rectangular area. If the target area you want to hit doesn't cover the entire area, the damage might be reduced or even nullified in a case of miss. In Starcraft 2 units attack speed is slightly randomized. Not to mention advantages of getting specific spot when the match starts, having very slight camera advantage (yeah, this is kind of nitpicky but camera is not entirely top-down so it helps.)
People want to win. Winning makes people feel good.
If you're playing a card game with friends or just with some local folks, you might be tempted to try and have some more fun with it and try crazy stuff out. When it comes to an online ladder though, your score is what matters most.
But why does it MATTERS at all? The only benefit I see from being up in the ladder is having better golden cards at the end of the season, but after reaching rank5 there is little reward (in the shape of a single extra golden common) so beyond that I see nothing but trying to fill your lack of self esteem to rank up in the ladder.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
There is nothing left if you can not has the right to bear your arms - werebear 2016-eternity campaign
Actually these so called "competitive" games also have some RNG. For example, a lot of FPS games randomize where you hit in specified rectangular area. If the target area you want to hit doesn't cover the entire area, the damage might be reduced or even nullified in a case of miss.
WTF you're talking about? that's not RNG, there is no randomness in that, you either hit a high-damage point or you hit a low-damage point, obviously hitting the enemy's head would yield more damage, while a limb would deal less damage, the damage is not random is a simple matematical operation weapon damage - target's armor/body part hit's factor = total life points reduced.
good vs bad Aiming is NOT RNG. The stupid excuses ppl make, lol.
WTF you're talking about? that's not RNG, there is no randomness in that, you either hit a high-damage point or you hit a low-damage point, obviously hitting the enemy's head would yield more damage, while a limb would deal less damage, the damage is not random is a simple matematical operation weapon damage - target's armor/body part hit's factor = total life points reduced.
good vs bad Aiming is NOT RNG. The stupid excuses ppl make, lol.
He was talking about things such as bullet spread in CS, which is absolutely random. Moba's have a random chance for critical strikes, and so forth. If you want to critize that just say that it pales in comparison to HS, but what he said wasn't wrong at all.
bullet spread is not random if you read the right guides and pratice enough. Even shotgun patters are "decoded" for the competitive scene.
And if I'm not mistaken (since my experience in CS stopped right before GO) CS has 0 real spread outside of shotguns, is nothing but sight changing size but the actual point where the bullet goes is the same, something you can circumvent with practice.
And you're going to show me what random critical hit chances you're bringing up, because I play LoL from time to time and played DOta2 a lot and I never saw "random damage done" but more about specific ways of increasing your damage for short time spans.
stop complaining about rng or competitive problem in hs.
every card games also have same problem. good match up or have solution in hand then win or loses when failed to answer opponent play. all depend on mulligan, card draw , top deck etc,
hs is more balanced compare to certain card games . some card games allow you play many card start from turn 1. turn 1 draw perfect, and play 6 card 1 turn. ie: summon 3 minion . turn 2 opponent just concede. and some card games also have op deck that have 90% win rate that again every deck in meta. in the tourney, just see who is the lucky one get good draw and who bring more op deck.
hs deck match up is more balance . every deck have counter. aggro> mid range, mid range> control, control> aggro. Ofc , some loses you will loses when have good match up because of bad draw but this happen in all kind of card games. unless you play the pay to win card games. pay $500 get 99% win rate against every deck except mirror.
I personally see no value in treating hearthstone ladder as competitive, but it is competitive. By this I mean that you should play hearthstone purely to have fun, the competition is either beneficial to that goal or irrelevant to it. some people find that the game is not fun because they feel it is hard to play the game with weird fun decks and enjoy it because you lose half the time to stupid easy well trod uninteresting deck (not my own words, I don't care) and so they feel they have to either be frustrated while trying to have fun or try to have fun by attempting to do well and get the rush of being successful. This is being "competitive" and it usually leads to people getting bored fast.
You seem to think that hearthstone is not competitive, but it is, the ladder is competitive, and while you can play ignoring your rank and just have fun, the majority population does not do this. the majority wants to win for one reason or another.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Just fill your deck with one drops, that is creative deck design, right?
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I don't understand people that only play standard/ netdecks / competitive decks in hearthstone.
The game being extremely rng & luck-based, is anything but a serious competitive game.
You want to be competitive tryhard pro wannabe? Play starcraft 2 or cs:go, both games ten times harder than hearthstone, no luck in these games.
Play Hearthstone to have fun, wild or standard, but dont always bring "competitive" argument in a non-competitive game please.
There's never a best, world constantly evolve.
if everyone is playing massively powerful decks and the only way of getting currency in this game is winning then well you have to play decks that win against those massively powerful decks.
basically Hearthstone's way of earning stuff makes it more competitive than your average game, even for players that have more casual goals like crafting a random niche card like Feign Death for a deck they want to play. they have to win a lot to do it, this is not a moba where you get a fair amount of currency even if you lose and it's not a game like starcraft where you have access to all the game from the start.
People want to win. Winning makes people feel good.
If you're playing a card game with friends or just with some local folks, you might be tempted to try and have some more fun with it and try crazy stuff out. When it comes to an online ladder though, your score is what matters most.
One does not simply walk into Mordor,
unless they want to be the best they can be.
Another person that believes games with lots of RNG doesn't have any skill involved and can't be competative . Do I detect a rank 20 player?
Hearthstone has a lot of skill (if also a lot of RNG).
You have decisions about the following:
When to trade, when to face.
Order of cards.
Which card to play in which situation.
When to save or use AoE.
When to play around cards.
When to play around RNG.
How to trade or cast spells to give RNG the best chance at the best outcome.
etc
Yes individual games can be decided by RNG but long term better players will rise to the top and bad players will sink to the bottom.
I'm sure you realise Poker is played competitively and thats an RNG game but thats played extremely competitively for millions of dollars. Hell even an RNGfest like Monopoly is played competitively and even that has skill involved.
And when there is any element of being able to get an edge on your opponent then people will take it. In this case better decks by netdecking from the pros (this actually proves the point that its not all RNG since there are better decks from better players to look at).
If Its all RNG then everyone would just have 50% win rate no mater what, but top 100 pros will have 70%+ win rate with the exact same deck a 40% win rate player at rank 20 might use.
All Collectible Card Games are designed to be an interaction of both strategy and chance. Both elements are at play in any given match of any CCG. As such, CCGs are competitions where you can lose (or win) any particular individual match due to either skill, luck, or some combination of both in various proportions.
A person's skill at a CCG is not decided in a single match versus a single opponent. It is shown in the results of large numbers of matches against large number of opponents. So while luck may indeed decide the outcome of a single match, only a person who has actual skill in the game will have a win percentage of 57% to 60%, while those who have less skill will have win percentages of around 50%.
And yes - part of a player's skill is looking at the game's Metagame, designing a deck based on that metagame, and taking advantage of that knowledge to increase their chances of winning. People who ignore the metagame, or who sniff their noses at "netdecks" are doomed to mediocrity.
Say that to Blizzcon.
Blizzard intended for HS to be competitive, that's why people are talking about competitive HS. Get that through your thick skull, and try to find a grey matter to register that.
"Put your face in the light!" - Tirion Fordring
Why do you think everyone play competitively?.. you just don't see them in the right ranks
One does not simply walk into Mordor,
unless they want to be the best they can be.
Actually these so called "competitive" games also have some RNG. For example, a lot of FPS games randomize where you hit in specified rectangular area. If the target area you want to hit doesn't cover the entire area, the damage might be reduced or even nullified in a case of miss. In Starcraft 2 units attack speed is slightly randomized. Not to mention advantages of getting specific spot when the match starts, having very slight camera advantage (yeah, this is kind of nitpicky but camera is not entirely top-down so it helps.)
The only benefit I see from being up in the ladder is having better golden cards at the end of the season, but after reaching rank5 there is little reward (in the shape of a single extra golden common) so beyond that I see nothing but trying to fill your lack of self esteem to rank up in the ladder.
There is nothing left if you can not has the right to bear your arms - werebear 2016-eternity campaign
good vs bad Aiming is NOT RNG. The stupid excuses ppl make, lol.
There is nothing left if you can not has the right to bear your arms - werebear 2016-eternity campaign
How fast do you complete your collection with 10% win rate, compared to 50%?
And if I'm not mistaken (since my experience in CS stopped right before GO) CS has 0 real spread outside of shotguns, is nothing but sight changing size but the actual point where the bullet goes is the same, something you can circumvent with practice.
And you're going to show me what random critical hit chances you're bringing up, because I play LoL from time to time and played DOta2 a lot and I never saw "random damage done" but more about specific ways of increasing your damage for short time spans.
There is nothing left if you can not has the right to bear your arms - werebear 2016-eternity campaign
Because people want to blame something other than their own inability for their losses.
But... playing netdecks leaves them with no excuses for losing!
stop complaining about rng or competitive problem in hs.
every card games also have same problem. good match up or have solution in hand then win or loses when failed to answer opponent play. all depend on mulligan, card draw , top deck etc,
hs is more balanced compare to certain card games . some card games allow you play many card start from turn 1. turn 1 draw perfect, and play 6 card 1 turn. ie: summon 3 minion . turn 2 opponent just concede. and some card games also have op deck that have 90% win rate that again every deck in meta. in the tourney, just see who is the lucky one get good draw and who bring more op deck.
hs deck match up is more balance . every deck have counter. aggro> mid range, mid range> control, control> aggro. Ofc , some loses you will loses when have good match up because of bad draw but this happen in all kind of card games. unless you play the pay to win card games. pay $500 get 99% win rate against every deck except mirror.
I personally see no value in treating hearthstone ladder as competitive, but it is competitive. By this I mean that you should play hearthstone purely to have fun, the competition is either beneficial to that goal or irrelevant to it. some people find that the game is not fun because they feel it is hard to play the game with weird fun decks and enjoy it because you lose half the time to stupid easy well trod uninteresting deck (not my own words, I don't care) and so they feel they have to either be frustrated while trying to have fun or try to have fun by attempting to do well and get the rush of being successful. This is being "competitive" and it usually leads to people getting bored fast.
You seem to think that hearthstone is not competitive, but it is, the ladder is competitive, and while you can play ignoring your rank and just have fun, the majority population does not do this. the majority wants to win for one reason or another.
Just fill your deck with one drops, that is creative deck design, right?