Freeing design space is useless if you don't capitalize on it. They used this very same reasoning when nerfing/destroying things like Blade Flurry so they could "free design space" into printing more and better Rogue weapons. Where are they? Nowhere.
Lessening and removing cards and deck archetypes from the game is only good if NEW good cards and deck archetypes come in replacement as well. If all decks we'll see are more Jade, more stupid brainless playstyles like Pirates and more filler cards like Greaser Worgen then the game will stay just as shitty, "freed" design space or not.
That was I expansion ago, patience much? And your closing statement, all doomsayer and no substance, but you knew it.
Again, why ignore historical evidence? Karazhan was a disaster, Gadgetzan failed to do anything but push aggro to the extreme and kill lategame attrition Control with Jade. If history is anything to go by the next expansions aren't gonna magically be awesome just because 6 cards disappeared from standard.
Karazhan wasn't a disaster - the nerfs which occurred after Karazhan launched had the opposite effect of what was intended.
For the first time since the game launched, all four major archetypes were viable post-Gadgetzan, with aggro, control, mid-range and combo decks all finding representation among the top two tiers. Despite having the most degenerate opening we've yet seen, Pirate aggro decks have averaged win-rates between 50%-51% since Gadgetzan dropped - Blizzard has been nerfing aggro for the past year, and their play-testing correctly showed that a meta-game which lacked Leper Gnome and Abusive Sergeant, among other cards, would be fine for the Pirate package. They can't play-test for play-rate. For the past three weeks, aggro decks have had a surge in popularity. It's being addressed. The sky isn't falling.
Then again, I'm too new to really be unhappy with any changes. I welcome a new set of cards to make decks with and to have fun with. As for the cards leaving, I'll miss them, but if everyone else doesn't get to use them then it evens the playing field.
The problem is by removing those combo decks and nerfing pirate decks and removing Sylvanas from N'Zoth decks, Jade decks will then dominate the ladder. Also Reno decks will be gone after Emperror, Reno rotate out, making Kazakus unplayable in most way. So yeh Jade army is going to dominate. Especially Shaman
You do understand they can just add new cards that still play those archetypes playable right? 130 new cards in the next expansion. I'm sure there's some highlander type cards to help Kazakus.
Sorry But only thing Blizzard is doing with those changes is printing Money
There is noch Chance in f2p with 3 expansions a year .
I keep seeing this type of comment. Here's the simple math on it, assuming 400 gold earned per week with Quests and wins. That's actually a very reachable target. 400 x 52 (weeks per year) = 20,800 gold. That's 208 packs which is ~70 packs per expansion. How exactly is that "no chance" for F2P?
That requires you to play every single day of the year for varying lengths of time. Not everyone can do that.
They are making positive changes, but I don't know if I'd call them the best changes. Much of it has to do with different philosophies when it comes to design decisions and developer intervention, as well as what consequences their changes (or more often than not, lack of changes) have had in the past.
Positive change as far as I'm concerned means more deck archetypes and more variety. If, as people who are able to monitor the development and plan much farther ahead than us peons can predict, the Devs see this as a positive change I'm all for it.
Fun - that's the aspect we all want when we play a game, The ladder atm is a nightmare, face Shaman and face Warrior with the occasional Reno deck. That's pretty much been it for 2 whole months with some jade garbage thrown in for good measure. So bored of this right now, any deck that you build to counter one of these loses hard to the other archetype. It's just not a good place for any game to be in.
But lest we forget, TempoStorm are the main culprits behind this and other face decks over the years. So I do still want punch Reynad in his smug little face, much like when Zoo became a thing.
Sorry But only thing Blizzard is doing with those changes is printing Money
There is noch Chance in f2p with 3 expansions a year .
I keep seeing this type of comment. Here's the simple math on it, assuming 400 gold earned per week with Quests and wins. That's actually a very reachable target. 400 x 52 (weeks per year) = 20,800 gold. That's 208 packs which is ~70 packs per expansion. How exactly is that "no chance" for F2P?
That requires you to play every single day of the year for varying lengths of time. Not everyone can do that.
Then why do they think they should be able to have the access to all the content for free? This is a game, made by a company, to make money. It is F2P (Free to PLAY), it always has been, and it always will be. Whether you can play enough to grind out enough gold to stay competitive is your problem.
Freeing design space is useless if you don't capitalize on it. They used this very same reasoning when nerfing/destroying things like Blade Flurry so they could "free design space" into printing more and better Rogue weapons. Where are they? Nowhere.
Lessening and removing cards and deck archetypes from the game is only good if NEW good cards and deck archetypes come in replacement as well. If all decks we'll see are more Jade, more stupid brainless playstyles like Pirates and more filler cards like Greaser Worgen then the game will stay just as shitty, "freed" design space or not.
That was I expansion ago, patience much? And your closing statement, all doomsayer and no substance, but you knew it.
Again, why ignore historical evidence? Karazhan was a disaster, Gadgetzan failed to do anything but push aggro to the extreme and kill lategame attrition Control with Jade. If history is anything to go by the next expansions aren't gonna magically be awesome just because 6 cards disappeared from standard.
Karazhan wasn't a disaster - the nerfs which occurred after Karazhan launched had the opposite effect of what was intended.
For the first time since the game launched, all four major archetypes were viable post-Gadgetzan, with aggro, control, mid-range and combo decks all finding representation among the top two tiers. Despite having the most degenerate opening we've yet seen, Pirate aggro decks have averaged win-rates between 50%-51% since Gadgetzan dropped
I'm not even gonna bother, this is the same kind of statistical hogwash Blizzard's been using to defend games ending by turn4. The same kind of tunnelvision that doesn't take into account health and enjoyment of the game.
"All four major archetypes are viable?" What kind of game have you been playing? All you see on ladder is Pirate Mage, Pirate Shaman and the occasional Reno trying to fight both.
Sorry But only thing Blizzard is doing with those changes is printing Money
There is noch Chance in f2p with 3 expansions a year .
I keep seeing this type of comment. Here's the simple math on it, assuming 400 gold earned per week with Quests and wins. That's actually a very reachable target. 400 x 52 (weeks per year) = 20,800 gold. That's 208 packs which is ~70 packs per expansion. How exactly is that "no chance" for F2P?
That requires you to play every single day of the year for varying lengths of time. Not everyone can do that.
Well if someone is playing for free, why should they also expect that everything should be easy to obtain? You have to play the game and save up in-game currency to get things free, and not even as much as you exaggerated.
Apparently some people don't want or are unable to make the effort, and yet act as though they were wronged because they don't have easy access to all the new content.
Sometimes I feel like F2P players don't know what F2P means.
I'm not incredibly impressed by the announced changes. The nerfs may slow down the meta, but it will still be dominated by the other OP cards. Power creep seems to be the biggest challenge for HS. I don't think the changes address that.
I agree with OP, I'm pretty happy with these changes. I still have my gripes like everyone, particularly with the slow pace of changes to the game, but the community was asking for changes, and they've announced big ones, which sound good to me. I think there's a lot of letting the perfect be the enemy of the good going on. Just because they didn't address EVERY ISSUE IN THE GAME EVER ALL AT ONCE doesn't mean that they can't still have taken meaningful positive steps.
There isn't a change I disagree with. We need more cards released and we need some Classic cards to rotate to really achieve the goal of Standard, to have continual change. Getting around to having alt heroes for all classes, giving dust and additional rewards that they don't have to (but are closer to what some other games hand out), all good.
So nothing at all being done in the roadmap is disagreeable to me. If anything, I'd just ask for more of everything - six Classic cards rotating is a start , but there's another 6-8 that are low-hanging fruit and should have been sent right away, and probably another dozen that could go if they were really intent on making a splash instead of baby steps. Several of the Classic cards nerfed in the past year should be reverted and moved to Wild now, not thought about and maybe done in another 15 months. Let's get the alternate Druid and Warlock heroes out now. Two very problematic cards are changing; let's make another sweep since they are far from the only un-fun things in the current meta. More rewards/login rewards are nice, but let's expand to a more tangible achievements system and tournament/competition mode.
I am a collector and moving from 2 adventures and 1 expansion in 2015 to 3 expansion in 2017 is a plain spit in our face
Why? Because giving us more cards to collect is a bad thing? I get that people don't like spending money on a free to play game but at its roots it's a card game, digital or not. You don't see Magic players complaining that they have to buy packs to get the newest and best cards.
Adventures are fun and all but rarely do they shake up the meta and allow for new archetypes (LoE being the exception of course). Most of the time they just bring supplement cards to the table which are intended to fit into existing decks.
I am a collector and moving from 2 adventures and 1 expansion in 2015 to 3 expansion in 2017 is a plain spit in our face
Why? Because giving us more cards to collect is a bad thing? I get that people don't like spending money on a free to play game but at its roots it's a card game, digital or not. You don't see Magic players complaining that they have to buy packs to get the newest and best cards.
Adventures are fun and all but rarely do they shake up the meta and allow for new archetypes (LoE being the exception of course). Most of the time they just bring supplement cards to the table which are intended to fit into existing decks.
It's pretty easy to collect all the cards for free on the online version of magic, which does have less cards than the physical version of magic. It's also easier on several other ccgs to collect cards.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Remember this:
On 10 happy users, only 2 will say it on forums.
On 10 unhappy users, 10 of them will say it on forums.
That's why there is so much complain ;D
Love the tribes.
I am happy with the changes.
Then again, I'm too new to really be unhappy with any changes. I welcome a new set of cards to make decks with and to have fun with. As for the cards leaving, I'll miss them, but if everyone else doesn't get to use them then it evens the playing field.
Sorry But only thing Blizzard is doing with those changes is printing Money
There is noch Chance in f2p with 3 expansions a year .
Shaku, the Collector gave me the Plague
They are making positive changes, but I don't know if I'd call them the best changes. Much of it has to do with different philosophies when it comes to design decisions and developer intervention, as well as what consequences their changes (or more often than not, lack of changes) have had in the past.
Positive change as far as I'm concerned means more deck archetypes and more variety. If, as people who are able to monitor the development and plan much farther ahead than us peons can predict, the Devs see this as a positive change I'm all for it.
Fun - that's the aspect we all want when we play a game, The ladder atm is a nightmare, face Shaman and face Warrior with the occasional Reno deck. That's pretty much been it for 2 whole months with some jade garbage thrown in for good measure. So bored of this right now, any deck that you build to counter one of these loses hard to the other archetype. It's just not a good place for any game to be in.
But lest we forget, TempoStorm are the main culprits behind this and other face decks over the years. So I do still want punch Reynad in his smug little face, much like when Zoo became a thing.
Hey, execute is a popular warrior class card why don't you fucking remove that too?
Apparently some people don't want or are unable to make the effort, and yet act as though they were wronged because they don't have easy access to all the new content.
I'm not incredibly impressed by the announced changes. The nerfs may slow down the meta, but it will still be dominated by the other OP cards. Power creep seems to be the biggest challenge for HS. I don't think the changes address that.
I agree with OP, I'm pretty happy with these changes. I still have my gripes like everyone, particularly with the slow pace of changes to the game, but the community was asking for changes, and they've announced big ones, which sound good to me. I think there's a lot of letting the perfect be the enemy of the good going on. Just because they didn't address EVERY ISSUE IN THE GAME EVER ALL AT ONCE doesn't mean that they can't still have taken meaningful positive steps.
I'm happy with the adjustments. A little sad with no more Sylvanas, Rags or Azure Drake but the hope of more deathrattles intrigues me.
I personally think it's pretty positive myself. But there will always be naysayers
There isn't a change I disagree with. We need more cards released and we need some Classic cards to rotate to really achieve the goal of Standard, to have continual change. Getting around to having alt heroes for all classes, giving dust and additional rewards that they don't have to (but are closer to what some other games hand out), all good.
So nothing at all being done in the roadmap is disagreeable to me. If anything, I'd just ask for more of everything - six Classic cards rotating is a start , but there's another 6-8 that are low-hanging fruit and should have been sent right away, and probably another dozen that could go if they were really intent on making a splash instead of baby steps. Several of the Classic cards nerfed in the past year should be reverted and moved to Wild now, not thought about and maybe done in another 15 months. Let's get the alternate Druid and Warlock heroes out now. Two very problematic cards are changing; let's make another sweep since they are far from the only un-fun things in the current meta. More rewards/login rewards are nice, but let's expand to a more tangible achievements system and tournament/competition mode.
CCGing since '98.
positive changes?
the way I see it: it's all about money >_>
why they replaced the adventure with another expansion? cuz expansion = more money for them!