Since the hot topic lately seems to be the "new player experience", how about this situation, and question. Should there be a limit on how many Legendary cards are allowed in a deck?
Obviously, the knee jerk reaction is "HELL NO!" ... and with some justifiable cause. Just packing a deck with gold gems doesn't make it a winner, right? Or does it?
Well, it's pretty damn tough for a new player .. hell, ANY player, to face a deck running 6 Legendary cards, one of which, Sindragosa, generates 2 more, and DK Jaina. (specific deck I faced was a freeze mage that seemed to just toss in every monster legendary card you could think of ...once the match hit turn 8, there was no way you were gonna beat it.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I wanna glide down, over Mulholland I wanna write her, name in the sky I wanna free fall, out into nothin' Gonna leave this, world for awhile
I would say that if they were to be able to implement a type of system on the ladder that is able to filter out certain things that would be helpful. For example from from rank 25 to maybe 19 or so, only allow so many legendary minions. Then as the player progresses, the opponent will obviously become more difficult matched on their own personal records. I use maybe two or theee legendary minions (if even that) in most any of my decks. However I do believe that at the start of the ladder there should be limitations.
As of late there really aren't that many viable wallet decks, most good decks only utilize a handful at most.
So my answer is no, not really. Obviously higher value cards will give you an advantage over a player with less in their collection, but it doesn't mean they stand zero chance either. This is just the nature of card games, the underdog will usually be upset about it but they will eventually be in the opposite position if they keep playing.
I do have to say, the deck idea isn't bad if you have the cards. It's not that difficult for a decent mage (or any good control class) to make it to turn 7 or 8, and then just start dropping bombs. Hell, I was playing control warlock against it, and was able to hard remove 3 of them, but after a point, you run out of bullets :-)
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I wanna glide down, over Mulholland I wanna write her, name in the sky I wanna free fall, out into nothin' Gonna leave this, world for awhile
Limiting the legendary pool can kill some decks, especially in wild. If you implement it strictly to ranks it creates an illusion of how good a new player is. Lastly, the players that don't intent to grind to legend every season may need one deck copied multiple times, so they will satisfy the limitation.
How about not limiting the legendary cards and giving free to play players more gold and packs like gwent does?
lol ... so I guess this is becoming a thing now ...
Just played a Druid ... couple ramp turns, then drops Y'Shaarj, Rage Unbound, who summons Ysera, Medivh, the Guardian, and Barnes ... kinda game over at that point. Doesn't look like Innervate nerf hurt that bad .. he was still able to drop a 10 mana card on turn 6.
I guess if ya got 'em, may as well play 'em.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I wanna glide down, over Mulholland I wanna write her, name in the sky I wanna free fall, out into nothin' Gonna leave this, world for awhile
The problem isn't 'wallet' decks with large numbers of legendary minions. It is perfectly fine having 'aspirational' expensive decks as long as they are not dominating (they aren't).
The problem is the low number of strong decks with 0 legendaries. Or more to the point, effective decks for under 1000 dust. Strong not particularly meaning tier 1. Counting tier 2 decks and high tier 3 decks. It is the cheaper competitive decks which give an entrance to the meta.
Please note: early reports post nerf indicate hunter is performing well. This might enable a cheap deck.
There is no reason to this. There are so many decks killing you before turn 8... ...even without legendaries.
I just feels and looks like a new way of showing off a collection. Just run a decent control deck to get into late game, and start dropping the gold bombs. But ... from a druid perspective, if you can ramp up and drop Y'Sharrj on turn 6 or 7, and you have a handful of big ass legendary minions, there isn't a lot that can keep up.
But somewhere its obviously a net deck thing, because I have seen 4 similar decks tonight, and I can't recall seeing them anytime before.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I wanna glide down, over Mulholland I wanna write her, name in the sky I wanna free fall, out into nothin' Gonna leave this, world for awhile
In Hearthstone, a Legendary card means a unique card, not a blatantly overpowered card. In fact, putting too many Legendary actually makes your deck weaker.
Which is why the 35 Legendary deck is just a meme deck.
There is no reason to this. There are so many decks killing you before turn 8... ...even without legendaries.
I just feels and looks like a new way of showing off a collection. Just run a decent control deck to get into late game, and start dropping the gold bombs. But ... from a druid perspective, if you can ramp up and drop Y'Sharrj on turn 6 or 7, and you have a handful of big ass legendary minions, there isn't a lot that can keep up.
But somewhere its obviously a net deck thing, because I have seen 4 similar decks tonight, and I can't recall seeing them anytime before.
Mage, Warrior, Shaman, Rogue and Priest all have hard removal in the basic set. What you are complaining about can be done with vanilla cards with high stats too. Your issue is late game cards in general.
If your opponent drops sindragosa and you play SW death and you're the one behind, then idk what to tell you.
If legendaries were on average better than other cards then every deck would be full of them. Most decks run only a few legendaries.
Up until jade druid's domination do you know what the most common legendary was? A 1 mana 1/1.
Mage, Warrior, Shaman, Rogue and Priest all have hard removal in the basic set. What you are complaining about can be done with vanilla cards with high stats too. Your issue is late game cards in general.
Hard removal only goes so far (and only works if you have it ready when needed. The first time I came across a deck like this, I was actually playing demon control warlock. I don't think there is a better deck out with more hard removal, but after blowing both Siphon Soul, a Twisting Nether, and burning one down with multiple spells .. eventually you run out of bullets.
And the biggest issue with the Legendary minions is their additional effects, not just big size (I would take a wall of Giants over a wall of Legendary any day) ... when you have Lich King and Ysera generating spells every turn (granted, Lich King's aren't all that great .. but), or Deathwing, Dragonlord filling a board with dragons, or Leeroy smacking you in the face with his damn chicken ... you get the idea.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I wanna glide down, over Mulholland I wanna write her, name in the sky I wanna free fall, out into nothin' Gonna leave this, world for awhile
I play a lot of Demon Control Lock, I usually face a lot of decks with many big minions and lategame cards. I never, never, never run out of bullets as you said. If you use Nether on 2 mediocre minions of course you lose. I see a lot of my opponents burn their hard removals for literary nothing. Man, in a Control vs Control matchup you have to be greedy with removals, otherwise of course your opponents destroy you with their bigger threats.
I think HS has generally been fairly forgiving about power level compared to dust cost. There has always been powerful cheap decks and slamming expensive cards into a deck has rarely been the key to making it better. Sure, control decks often benefit from big powerful legendaries ("wallet decks"), but control decks have rarely (if ever) been oppressive.
There are many thing I complain about when it comes to HS designs, but in that regard I think they are on the money. I have friends who play the game on the side, and most of them can for little investment use powerful decks. They might miss out on a broad selection of competitive decks, but I think that's fair.
Pointless change really, while there are some legendaries that are vital win conditions, limiting the number would just kill quite a few decks with no actual change on game balance. More legendaries does not necessarily equal more power. Just look at Hunters, they can quite effortlessly take down control decks containing 8+ legendaries, while often using none themselves.
Encourage Team 5 to set arbitrary restrictions on the majority of the playerbase in order to appease new players, which arguably are the minority group of players. Where else have I heard of a game that didn't know if their main target audience was new or already established players, hmm... ?
I think it is a silly idea. It gets to a point where you might as well have Team 5 tell you exactly how you are supposed to play if the 'shoulds' and 'should nots' of how to play the game are so trivially micro and macro-managed.
I think heartstone legedaries are not that overpowered to limit them. When i compare to gwent (another card game) You can only have 4 legendaries in your deck. The legedaries are way stronger in the game tho and can carry you to victory. So it looks frustrating for new people, but you can get rank 5 with a good budget deck.
Since the hot topic lately seems to be the "new player experience", how about this situation, and question. Should there be a limit on how many Legendary cards are allowed in a deck?
Obviously, the knee jerk reaction is "HELL NO!" ... and with some justifiable cause. Just packing a deck with gold gems doesn't make it a winner, right? Or does it?
Well, it's pretty damn tough for a new player .. hell, ANY player, to face a deck running 6 Legendary cards, one of which, Sindragosa, generates 2 more, and DK Jaina. (specific deck I faced was a freeze mage that seemed to just toss in every monster legendary card you could think of ...once the match hit turn 8, there was no way you were gonna beat it.
I wanna glide down, over Mulholland
I wanna write her, name in the sky
I wanna free fall, out into nothin'
Gonna leave this, world for awhile
I would say that if they were to be able to implement a type of system on the ladder that is able to filter out certain things that would be helpful. For example from from rank 25 to maybe 19 or so, only allow so many legendary minions. Then as the player progresses, the opponent will obviously become more difficult matched on their own personal records. I use maybe two or theee legendary minions (if even that) in most any of my decks. However I do believe that at the start of the ladder there should be limitations.
Bleed Blue.
As of late there really aren't that many viable wallet decks, most good decks only utilize a handful at most.
So my answer is no, not really. Obviously higher value cards will give you an advantage over a player with less in their collection, but it doesn't mean they stand zero chance either. This is just the nature of card games, the underdog will usually be upset about it but they will eventually be in the opposite position if they keep playing.
I do have to say, the deck idea isn't bad if you have the cards. It's not that difficult for a decent mage (or any good control class) to make it to turn 7 or 8, and then just start dropping bombs. Hell, I was playing control warlock against it, and was able to hard remove 3 of them, but after a point, you run out of bullets :-)
I wanna glide down, over Mulholland
I wanna write her, name in the sky
I wanna free fall, out into nothin'
Gonna leave this, world for awhile
Limiting the legendary pool can kill some decks, especially in wild. If you implement it strictly to ranks it creates an illusion of how good a new player is. Lastly, the players that don't intent to grind to legend every season may need one deck copied multiple times, so they will satisfy the limitation.
How about not limiting the legendary cards and giving free to play players more gold and packs like gwent does?
lol ... so I guess this is becoming a thing now ...
Just played a Druid ... couple ramp turns, then drops Y'Shaarj, Rage Unbound, who summons Ysera, Medivh, the Guardian, and Barnes ... kinda game over at that point. Doesn't look like Innervate nerf hurt that bad .. he was still able to drop a 10 mana card on turn 6.
I guess if ya got 'em, may as well play 'em.
I wanna glide down, over Mulholland
I wanna write her, name in the sky
I wanna free fall, out into nothin'
Gonna leave this, world for awhile
There is no reason to this. There are so many decks killing you before turn 8... ...even without legendaries.
EU 11/2015+ , f2p 03/2021+: DK 63 / DH 205 /Dr 277 / Hu 733 / Ma 6666 / Pa 1072 / Pr 1165 / Ro 1791 / Sh 1303 / Wl 707 / Wr 664
The problem isn't 'wallet' decks with large numbers of legendary minions. It is perfectly fine having 'aspirational' expensive decks as long as they are not dominating (they aren't).
The problem is the low number of strong decks with 0 legendaries. Or more to the point, effective decks for under 1000 dust. Strong not particularly meaning tier 1. Counting tier 2 decks and high tier 3 decks. It is the cheaper competitive decks which give an entrance to the meta.
Please note: early reports post nerf indicate hunter is performing well. This might enable a cheap deck.
But somewhere its obviously a net deck thing, because I have seen 4 similar decks tonight, and I can't recall seeing them anytime before.
I wanna glide down, over Mulholland
I wanna write her, name in the sky
I wanna free fall, out into nothin'
Gonna leave this, world for awhile
In Hearthstone, a Legendary card means a unique card, not a blatantly overpowered card. In fact, putting too many Legendary actually makes your deck weaker.
Which is why the 35 Legendary deck is just a meme deck.
Hard removal only goes so far (and only works if you have it ready when needed. The first time I came across a deck like this, I was actually playing demon control warlock. I don't think there is a better deck out with more hard removal, but after blowing both Siphon Soul, a Twisting Nether, and burning one down with multiple spells .. eventually you run out of bullets.
And the biggest issue with the Legendary minions is their additional effects, not just big size (I would take a wall of Giants over a wall of Legendary any day) ... when you have Lich King and Ysera generating spells every turn (granted, Lich King's aren't all that great .. but), or Deathwing, Dragonlord filling a board with dragons, or Leeroy smacking you in the face with his damn chicken ... you get the idea.
I wanna glide down, over Mulholland
I wanna write her, name in the sky
I wanna free fall, out into nothin'
Gonna leave this, world for awhile
I play a lot of Demon Control Lock, I usually face a lot of decks with many big minions and lategame cards. I never, never, never run out of bullets as you said. If you use Nether on 2 mediocre minions of course you lose. I see a lot of my opponents burn their hard removals for literary nothing. Man, in a Control vs Control matchup you have to be greedy with removals, otherwise of course your opponents destroy you with their bigger threats.
I think HS has generally been fairly forgiving about power level compared to dust cost. There has always been powerful cheap decks and slamming expensive cards into a deck has rarely been the key to making it better. Sure, control decks often benefit from big powerful legendaries ("wallet decks"), but control decks have rarely (if ever) been oppressive.
There are many thing I complain about when it comes to HS designs, but in that regard I think they are on the money. I have friends who play the game on the side, and most of them can for little investment use powerful decks. They might miss out on a broad selection of competitive decks, but I think that's fair.
Pointless change really, while there are some legendaries that are vital win conditions, limiting the number would just kill quite a few decks with no actual change on game balance. More legendaries does not necessarily equal more power. Just look at Hunters, they can quite effortlessly take down control decks containing 8+ legendaries, while often using none themselves.
Encourage Team 5 to set arbitrary restrictions on the majority of the playerbase in order to appease new players, which arguably are the minority group of players. Where else have I heard of a game that didn't know if their main target audience was new or already established players, hmm... ?
I think it is a silly idea. It gets to a point where you might as well have Team 5 tell you exactly how you are supposed to play if the 'shoulds' and 'should nots' of how to play the game are so trivially micro and macro-managed.
I think heartstone legedaries are not that overpowered to limit them. When i compare to gwent (another card game) You can only have 4 legendaries in your deck. The legedaries are way stronger in the game tho and can carry you to victory. So it looks frustrating for new people, but you can get rank 5 with a good budget deck.
Golden Heroes in order:
Mage, Warlock, Priest, Shaman, Warrior, Rogue, Paladin