As the title states Ragnaros the Firelord should be banned from being played in tournaments.
While I understand that RNG is an important element of this game, it should not decide who wins and who loses the game. I was too tired to watch the finals of the HyperX Invitational yesterday but from what I read, the last two games were decided by Ragnaros coin flips.
It is entertaining and creates a lot of suspense; however, if HS as an esport wants to be taken - at least a little - more serious, game-deciding RNG cards should be banned from tournaments. While Sylvanas Windrunner serves the same purpose, 'skill' is still a factor since players can mostly guarantee work towards stealing a particular target.
If you allow yourself to go to 8 health before Ragnaros the Firelord is played, then you really didn't play around the card. It's not any different than playing around any other card your opponent might have.
I agree Ban Rags. I mean how many times have we seen Ragnaros the Firelord only needing to hit that one Taunted minion and it instead hits the 1/1 token causing the game to be determined right there. No skill RNGesus shouldn't be used to determine games in tournaments.
While we are at it can we please ban the following since it would make my life easier:
probability involved with a play is when skill truly becomes a factor. When you decide to deadlyshot with only ragnaros on the board, its an easy decision, with a clear outcome. When there is a ragnaros, a yeti, and an argent squire, and you gotta decide whether or not to deadlyshot, thats when skill is involved. You gotta decide what your average odds of winning gain is for each of the 3 possibilities and decide whether its worth it.
While Sylvanas Windrunner serves the same purpose, 'skill' is still a factor since players can mostly guarantee work towards stealing a particular target.
How does one guarantee that Sylvanas hits a particular target, while being unable to guarantee that Rag hits a particular target?
Instead of attacking at the END of your turn he attacks at the START of your turn. Would at least give people the chance to respond when he's dropped. Dumped onto a clear board he's essentially got Charge, which I don't think was ever the intention.
To be fair, I get what the OP is saying. It is why they nerfed Nat along with Tinkmaster. It is a card in which the RNG of it is so game-breaking. That being said, you really have to draw a line and figure out when enough is enough, otherwise you will see constant complaints about certain cards and their RNG potential.
While Sylvanas Windrunner serves the same purpose, 'skill' is still a factor since players can mostly guarantee work towards stealing a particular target.
How does one guarantee that Sylvanas hits a particular target, while being unable to guarantee that Rag hits a particular target?
Rag can hit face, so you cannot force it to hit a minion, but you can force it to hit the face. Sylvanas can be forced to steal 1 target minion.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Unless explicitly stated, my posts are my opinion and mine only.
He would be almost unplayable if it was at start. Card playability is determined primarily by it's impact it has when played. Even deathrattle effects have immediate impact by forcing you to play around them. Typically I expect ragnaros to die the turn after I play him. If i didn't get EOT effect I wouldn't play him at all.
OP you're always gonna have a hard time discussing balance here (especially competitive). I don't really agree with you and I'll tell you why in a moment.
My whole group is so oddly surprised at how this game is having tournaments for 6 figures. Honestly I keep relating this to game to backgammon. In backgammon almost every rolls move can be decided quite quickly (especially early in the game), as the game goes on you have to take a risk at some point, but there are times you don't have to. There are times when a game of backgammon plays itself (when my mother plays). There are also times you have to take risks or play oddly (but that is generally because of consecutive odd rolls). There are times where you get great rolls but my opponent (mom) gets a double 6, double 6, double 5 and double 6 consecutively (on average she rolls about 5 doubles in 20 rolls from my tracking, we're sending her to tournaments now).
The point I am making about the comparison is: How often do your direct actions decide a game of Hearthstone?
I would venture it's far closer to 50/50 luck/skill than any other game played for such high stakes. SC2, LoL, Dota, Halo, CoD - All these games are pretty much pure skill with very few elements of RNG that can cause an immediate loss on their own, there is also very little counterplay (and no immediate counterplay) to almost every element of the game (and the answers are usually hit alls: IE Hex on 95% of creatures). The card pool and net decking don't help at all as this removes deck building skill as well, MTG history wouldn't be the same if netdecking was available in the 90s. Trix may have never happened! Even the first turn kill combo would have been everywhere all at once.
Hearthstone has almost no counterplay elements outside of playing with your deck in the deck builder. Once you are in the game you need to have the answers at the right time to win (regardless of how well you built your deck). I don't feel this is always the case in other CCG (especially in certain formats).
Anyone saying "It sucks to get manascrewed more than losing to a coin flip" has not played enough competitive MTG. With 21 lands in a deck you have 35% chance of drawing them every draw. You would have to draw more than 3 lands in 7 cards to be going against the assumed outcome (2.5 lands per 7 cards). The odds of drawing more than 3 lands are quite low compared to playing a 50/50 with RagNaGeesus. Then again MTG has far more interaction and skill elements than this game does (by a long shot). It also doesn't feature many if any game defining cards that are based on RNG.
@OP I agree with you that I hate to see games decided on a coin flip, but what else is poker when you play out the whole hand and finally see the river? Same with Backgammon (which is so old and just had another world tournament). These games have RNG that most other highly competitive video games don't feature nearly as much. And there is a huge market for poker and HS right now.
I played 10 games last night on ladder won the first 6, then lost 4 in a row on epic topdecks... I mean epic over and over and I just stopped. I could have gone on for more, I had the time, but no interest after losing like that over and over. It's the same thing with my family and backgammon. We play 1-2 games with my mother (or we watch her luck and track her stats) and decide if we want to be pummeled more. Usually we are done by midway through the second round when 25% of her rolls are doubles. I really feel about the same way with this game.
To me HS is a Deckbuilder first, card game second. This game almost always is playing itself (and this lends to me attempting to play with "higher skill" decks, basically more 1/2 decisions, at most 1/4 card play decisions). This isn't a problem, it's just a matter of preference. And like me OP we both like to see the better man win on their skill. Guess lucky RagNaGeesus is a part of the mad skills!
Instead of attacking at the END of your turn he attacks at the START of your turn. Would at least give people the chance to respond when he's dropped. Dumped onto a clear board he's essentially got Charge, which I don't think was ever the intention.
hh noone would play him if his abil was activated at start of your turn, srsly that would be only "win more" card then, cause u spent 8 mana and hope he will live, even druid's 8/8 at least have taunt so it "protects" u, but what u are suggesting is 99% unplayable imho
ps: if this card would be ever nerfed to still be playable i think only way to do it is to make it for example hit for 6dmg not 8
Well guys if you want to know the truth Rag ain't the problem. The problem is the way Hearthstone is played right now in a tournament. Every tournament is played exactly like League of Legends or Dota 2. Games that have extremely little RNG, LoL even more so than Doto. Still for the amount of RNG inherent in a card game like Hearthstone, it is ridiculous to expect a best of 3 or 5 to be enough to decide who is better. Look at poker, it's probably one of the games where RNG is at the highest possible level. But they play a ton of hands, so at the end you can say the better player wins. Because overall he won the most hands. In hearthstone yesterday I think some guy I've never even heard before beat Amaz. The best player in the world at hearthstone. And in before you start saying it's not Amaz it's totalrandomperson or something like that, he has the best winrate/games played. So yeah they should probably change the way tournaments work, they should do it Round Robin style. Everybody plays everybody in a best of 3/5 at least once. And the guy with the highest overall winrate is declared the victor. Or do it like the LoL does it with the LCS have the teams play a ton of games over a season. And at the end the overall best wins it.
But the biggest problem for hearthstone as an esport, is honestly Blizzard. They need to establish these things themselves, their current attitude of whatever happens happens, or if you guys really want it we'll do it for you eventually. Just doesn't work. They need to become proactive instead of reactive. They need to take the initiative. They shouldn't be using the Valve model, where they leave all this to the community. It just isn't as efficient.
QFT, cannot agree with this post more!
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
As the title states Ragnaros the Firelord should be banned from being played in tournaments.
While I understand that RNG is an important element of this game, it should not decide who wins and who loses the game. I was too tired to watch the finals of the HyperX Invitational yesterday but from what I read, the last two games were decided by Ragnaros coin flips.
It is entertaining and creates a lot of suspense; however, if HS as an esport wants to be taken - at least a little - more serious, game-deciding RNG cards should be banned from tournaments. While Sylvanas Windrunner serves the same purpose, 'skill' is still a factor since players can mostly guarantee work towards stealing a particular target.
Then all the cards with an RNG effect must be banned form tours not only Ragnaros..I 've seen alot of tournaments and realy ragnaros aint a problem :)
If you allow yourself to go to 8 health before Ragnaros the Firelord is played, then you really didn't play around the card. It's not any different than playing around any other card your opponent might have.
And of course Pyroblast can also decide games depending on whether it's topdecked or not, so that should be banned from tournaments. And Mind Control
And so on and so on...
Meh, I'd rather watch someone get Rag-screwed then Mana-screwed. But maybe that's just me.
Unless explicitly stated, my posts are my opinion and mine only.
66 beat AA all in at WSoP final table...ban 6's in poker tournaments!
I agree Ban Rags. I mean how many times have we seen Ragnaros the Firelord only needing to hit that one Taunted minion and it instead hits the 1/1 token causing the game to be determined right there. No skill RNGesus shouldn't be used to determine games in tournaments.
While we are at it can we please ban the following since it would make my life easier:
Thanks all
Best reply ever!
Woah, this thread is such a throwback to 3-4 months ago xD
my live stream;
http://www.twitch.tv/fortheundercity
probability involved with a play is when skill truly becomes a factor. When you decide to deadlyshot with only ragnaros on the board, its an easy decision, with a clear outcome. When there is a ragnaros, a yeti, and an argent squire, and you gotta decide whether or not to deadlyshot, thats when skill is involved. You gotta decide what your average odds of winning gain is for each of the 3 possibilities and decide whether its worth it.
Skill is playing Ragnaros in situtations where the RNG works in your favor.
You know, like everything else in a CCG.
How does one guarantee that Sylvanas hits a particular target, while being unable to guarantee that Rag hits a particular target?
A minor change to Rag could provide SOME relief.
Instead of attacking at the END of your turn he attacks at the START of your turn.
Would at least give people the chance to respond when he's dropped. Dumped onto a clear board he's essentially got Charge, which I don't think was ever the intention.
To be fair, I get what the OP is saying. It is why they nerfed Nat along with Tinkmaster. It is a card in which the RNG of it is so game-breaking. That being said, you really have to draw a line and figure out when enough is enough, otherwise you will see constant complaints about certain cards and their RNG potential.
Not to be overly dramatic, but that would nerf him to Nat Pagle Tinkmaster Overpark levels.
The immediate 8 damage is the primary reason to play Ragnaros. Otherwise he's worse than Ironbark Protector
Rag can hit face, so you cannot force it to hit a minion, but you can force it to hit the face. Sylvanas can be forced to steal 1 target minion.
Unless explicitly stated, my posts are my opinion and mine only.
He would be almost unplayable if it was at start. Card playability is determined primarily by it's impact it has when played. Even deathrattle effects have immediate impact by forcing you to play around them. Typically I expect ragnaros to die the turn after I play him. If i didn't get EOT effect I wouldn't play him at all.
OP you're always gonna have a hard time discussing balance here (especially competitive). I don't really agree with you and I'll tell you why in a moment.
My whole group is so oddly surprised at how this game is having tournaments for 6 figures. Honestly I keep relating this to game to backgammon. In backgammon almost every rolls move can be decided quite quickly (especially early in the game), as the game goes on you have to take a risk at some point, but there are times you don't have to. There are times when a game of backgammon plays itself (when my mother plays). There are also times you have to take risks or play oddly (but that is generally because of consecutive odd rolls). There are times where you get great rolls but my opponent (mom) gets a double 6, double 6, double 5 and double 6 consecutively (on average she rolls about 5 doubles in 20 rolls from my tracking, we're sending her to tournaments now).
The point I am making about the comparison is: How often do your direct actions decide a game of Hearthstone?
I would venture it's far closer to 50/50 luck/skill than any other game played for such high stakes. SC2, LoL, Dota, Halo, CoD - All these games are pretty much pure skill with very few elements of RNG that can cause an immediate loss on their own, there is also very little counterplay (and no immediate counterplay) to almost every element of the game (and the answers are usually hit alls: IE Hex on 95% of creatures). The card pool and net decking don't help at all as this removes deck building skill as well, MTG history wouldn't be the same if netdecking was available in the 90s. Trix may have never happened! Even the first turn kill combo would have been everywhere all at once.
Hearthstone has almost no counterplay elements outside of playing with your deck in the deck builder. Once you are in the game you need to have the answers at the right time to win (regardless of how well you built your deck). I don't feel this is always the case in other CCG (especially in certain formats).
Anyone saying "It sucks to get manascrewed more than losing to a coin flip" has not played enough competitive MTG. With 21 lands in a deck you have 35% chance of drawing them every draw. You would have to draw more than 3 lands in 7 cards to be going against the assumed outcome (2.5 lands per 7 cards). The odds of drawing more than 3 lands are quite low compared to playing a 50/50 with RagNaGeesus. Then again MTG has far more interaction and skill elements than this game does (by a long shot). It also doesn't feature many if any game defining cards that are based on RNG.
@OP I agree with you that I hate to see games decided on a coin flip, but what else is poker when you play out the whole hand and finally see the river? Same with Backgammon (which is so old and just had another world tournament). These games have RNG that most other highly competitive video games don't feature nearly as much. And there is a huge market for poker and HS right now.
I played 10 games last night on ladder won the first 6, then lost 4 in a row on epic topdecks... I mean epic over and over and I just stopped. I could have gone on for more, I had the time, but no interest after losing like that over and over.
It's the same thing with my family and backgammon. We play 1-2 games with my mother (or we watch her luck and track her stats) and decide if we want to be pummeled more. Usually we are done by midway through the second round when 25% of her rolls are doubles. I really feel about the same way with this game.
To me HS is a Deckbuilder first, card game second. This game almost always is playing itself (and this lends to me attempting to play with "higher skill" decks, basically more 1/2 decisions, at most 1/4 card play decisions). This isn't a problem, it's just a matter of preference. And like me OP we both like to see the better man win on their skill. Guess lucky RagNaGeesus is a part of the mad skills!
hh noone would play him if his abil was activated at start of your turn, srsly that would be only "win more" card then, cause u spent 8 mana and hope he will live, even druid's 8/8 at least have taunt so it "protects" u, but what u are suggesting is 99% unplayable imho
ps: if this card would be ever nerfed to still be playable i think only way to do it is to make it for example hit for 6dmg not 8
- Click Here To Join Us On Discord! -
QFT, cannot agree with this post more!