I'd have to run with cost. Having the cost of 60 packs increased from £40 to £60 was criminal. The only variance would be exchange rates. Dev and distribution costs remain the same so this has Bobby Kotick's grubby fingers all over it.
Second, the freebies given. I don't want a game for free but being able to consistently earn more than a pack a week could be very useful for some.
Fast decks should have lower winrate than slower decks. Having the same winrate is already stupid because it would infest the ladder with aggro. But the actual situation is even worse, Blizzard made aggro decks have the highest winrate in the game by a large difference, so ladder became an unbearable experience, aggro matches are very boring.
Quest hunter, quest paladin, quest warlock, elemental shaman, elemental mage, murloc shaman, overload shaman, totem shaman, frost shaman, deathrattle rogue, heal paladin, spell combo priest, and the list goes on.
I just don't understand, if blizzard wants to push new archetypes, why don't they give that archetype actual good cards? Specifically shaman has been getting failed attempts every single expansion since Un'Goro and the only real viable pick has been evolve shaman. I just wished they did card buffs for a change instead of only nerfs.
First off I would change the boringness of Ladder, from a time-sinking grind to something else (maybe a League system similar to the one they already use in HotS or OW). Then better reward for the end of Seasons to mark better the difference between the various ranks.
Also more balance patches: it's not a physical card game so they should fix asap things that are broken (I don't want tons of fixing for every rant in the internet but when obvious problematic issues arise - like Quest Rogue - then they should act fast, not wait for months). Those fixes also need to be something more soft that a nerf-into-oblivion option like they're now.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
For what profit is it to a man, if he gains the world and loses his own soul?
Ladder still sucks. Resets are too frequent and too steep. It's not fun that if I don't play for a week to start the month I'm at rank 17, so I want nothing more than to jam games for several hours to get back to a rank I want to play it, while new players/those with smaller collections have to face someone who has played for years and has a full collection. The system weights endurance over aptitude far too heavily. That's just the system itself, not even going into the gameplay/balance/diversity issues that can further weigh it down.
Honestly I don't have a lot of complaints about the game aside from the usual "I don't win enough". My complaint is with the hearthpwn forums - no obvious jump to last post function, an extreme clunky posting interface where it inserts a ton of unwanted formatting like if you write the word combo or push enter...etc. It's not the 1990s anymore, forums shouldn't be like this anymore.
I think that dust cost should be a 1/2 ratio instead of a 1/4 (ie it should cost 800 to craft a legendary, not 1600). This would balance out the drop rate issues.
My other massive complaint is the turn timer. I think it should be much faster. So many opponents go close to the end of the timer when they have like 3 cards in their hands, it makes the game frustrating. I'm not saying Nozdormu fast, but certainly faster than it currently is.
They are getting very money hungry with the constant expansion releases. I would prefer 2 adventures and 1 expansion each year, far less cost, doesn't omit so many players as who cant afford 20$ for a game they love, or save the gold up. But Now that they seem to have shifted to 3 major expansions with no adventure this past year, cost wise its getting crazy. I love the game, I've played since vanilla, i love having each card even if i don't use them in my collection and appreciate the art and history as someone who played WoW since beta. They have made some small changes like a guaranteed legendary at xpac launch, and one in your first 10 packs, and it seems the legendary rate has been slightly upped as during TGT / MSoG i got 4 legends from 120 packs. For KotFT and KoC i got about 10-12 legends for 120 packs each. So there has been small changes ,but not enough to make up for the large cost increases to stay relevant and build any deck you want.
My biggest actual complaint with the game is the community, in-game, and out.
Some level of "internet anonymity asshole syndrome" is to be expected, and exists in every online game I have played, all the way back to MUD's literally decades ago. But HS seems to take it to a new level. 90% of "friend" requests are just to wish cancer on you and your family. Because of this ... it's barely worth the effort to try to add an opponent after a good game, because players are so conditioned to BM, they either don't accept, or when they do, they often jump straight to "what the f*$k do you want?" as an immediate response. Even WoW, which gave you the ability to blast your frustration directly towards other players instantaneously, seemed to have a less caustic community.
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
First of all, you aren't collecting anything. So it really isn't a collector's game at all. You are being TAKEN. Yet the prices are similar to physical collector's games, despite Blizzard not having any production/printing/distribution/sales costs (though they do have more art/programming costs).
Second, box-set games that use cards are not unprecedented. So just because it plays like many other collector's games doesn't mean it can't be a box set. Think about it. Wouldn't the game be WAY healthier if each expansion was just a flat cost and then anyone who wanted to play could, and it would be even for all competitors?
Cost is the third highest complain so far and rewards is second (which is directly related to cost). Clearly it's an issue.
Lack of transparency in that the matchups are allegedly something other than completely random based on current star rank. Bad players should not be handed a favorable matchup due to low win rate/poor performance. Not sure if this is going on, but many claim it is and some defend it with a bogus 50% argument. The game maker needs to make an affirmative statement that it is not, and clean their house if it does. A 3rd party audit would be helpful in this regard.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Free to try and find a game, dealing cards for sorrow, cards for pain.
...Even WoW, which gave you the ability to blast your frustration directly towards other players instantaneously, seemed to have a less caustic community.
This x1000. When I played Everquest, you could talk to the PKs, tell them you think they were an asshole. After few times, you stopped doing it and learned to manage your emotions and that it wasn't personal (after all you did choose to be on the one PK enabled server). Much of the salt on these boards is just pent-up rage because the game maker doesn't want to pay someone to moderate in-game chat.
I'm still upset at the Deathstalker Rexxar fiasco, which caused to now be suspicious of basically any comment from the developers and suspect ulterior motives.
I'M also fully expecting that they will never actually fix Deathstalker Rexxar and just lead us on by saying "we're working on it, it's gonna take time" to avoid another meltdown (which will probably fail just as horribly as their first attempt to sweep that under the rug)
It's gotta be the staleness of the meta. I can't even remember the last time I saw a deck that's not either Cubelock, Aggro Paladin, Raza Priest, or Tempo Rogue in standard. It's been at least several days since I saw anything else at all, and I play quite a few games of hearthstone every day. Sometimes there are slight variations in the Cubelock decks, but the other 3 are pretty much 30/30 the exact same lists every time.
Part of this does fall upon the community and everyone wanting to play just a handful of decks even though you can get away with playing "inferior" decks and only sacrifice one or two percentage points of winrate. But I would say it's mostly Blizzard creating individual cards or synergies so powerful that they become must-build around and invalidate other decks and even other classes entirely.
I regard Cost, Drop Rates, and Dust Cost as basically all part of the same larger issue. I'd say that issue continues to be my biggest complaint, and it only seems to be worsening over time.
My second complaint would be lack of regular balancing, development updates, and up until recently innovation/content, though the latter seems to be getting better thanks to the promise of rewarding PvE content with expansions, as we saw with the last.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I'd have to run with cost. Having the cost of 60 packs increased from £40 to £60 was criminal. The only variance would be exchange rates. Dev and distribution costs remain the same so this has Bobby Kotick's grubby fingers all over it.
Second, the freebies given. I don't want a game for free but being able to consistently earn more than a pack a week could be very useful for some.
Golden Hero Collections thus far; -
Europe: Druid, Hunter, Paladin, Mage, Priest, Rogue, Shaman, Warlock, Warrior (9/9)
Americas: Druid, Mage, Paladin Shaman (4/9)
Everywhere else: Workin on it.. (0/9)
Fast decks should have lower winrate than slower decks. Having the same winrate is already stupid because it would infest the ladder with aggro. But the actual situation is even worse, Blizzard made aggro decks have the highest winrate in the game by a large difference, so ladder became an unbearable experience, aggro matches are very boring.
Lack of viable archetypes.
Here's a short list:
Quest hunter, quest paladin, quest warlock, elemental shaman, elemental mage, murloc shaman, overload shaman, totem shaman, frost shaman, deathrattle rogue, heal paladin, spell combo priest, and the list goes on.
I just don't understand, if blizzard wants to push new archetypes, why don't they give that archetype actual good cards? Specifically shaman has been getting failed attempts every single expansion since Un'Goro and the only real viable pick has been evolve shaman. I just wished they did card buffs for a change instead of only nerfs.
Why u hav to be mad? is only card gaem.
biggest complaint is casual not being casual enough.
Question everything.
First off I would change the boringness of Ladder, from a time-sinking grind to something else (maybe a League system similar to the one they already use in HotS or OW). Then better reward for the end of Seasons to mark better the difference between the various ranks.
Also more balance patches: it's not a physical card game so they should fix asap things that are broken (I don't want tons of fixing for every rant in the internet but when obvious problematic issues arise - like Quest Rogue - then they should act fast, not wait for months). Those fixes also need to be something more soft that a nerf-into-oblivion option like they're now.
For what profit is it to a man, if he gains the world and loses his own soul?
Ladder still sucks. Resets are too frequent and too steep. It's not fun that if I don't play for a week to start the month I'm at rank 17, so I want nothing more than to jam games for several hours to get back to a rank I want to play it, while new players/those with smaller collections have to face someone who has played for years and has a full collection. The system weights endurance over aptitude far too heavily. That's just the system itself, not even going into the gameplay/balance/diversity issues that can further weigh it down.
CCGing since '98.
I don't like that there's still only one limited mode after all these years. (although dungeon runs turned out better than I expected!)
►Youtube - New Video MON-FRI ►Twitch ►Twitter ►Hearthpwn ►Patreon
Honestly I don't have a lot of complaints about the game aside from the usual "I don't win enough". My complaint is with the hearthpwn forums - no obvious jump to last post function, an extreme clunky posting interface where it inserts a ton of unwanted formatting like if you write the word combo or push enter...etc. It's not the 1990s anymore, forums shouldn't be like this anymore.
The constant negativity and complaining on this forum. Calls for nerfs (even a post about how Tarim is too powerful) constantly.
I have two (I know the OP says one).
I think that dust cost should be a 1/2 ratio instead of a 1/4 (ie it should cost 800 to craft a legendary, not 1600). This would balance out the drop rate issues.
My other massive complaint is the turn timer. I think it should be much faster. So many opponents go close to the end of the timer when they have like 3 cards in their hands, it makes the game frustrating. I'm not saying Nozdormu fast, but certainly faster than it currently is.
They are getting very money hungry with the constant expansion releases. I would prefer 2 adventures and 1 expansion each year, far less cost, doesn't omit so many players as who cant afford 20$ for a game they love, or save the gold up. But Now that they seem to have shifted to 3 major expansions with no adventure this past year, cost wise its getting crazy. I love the game, I've played since vanilla, i love having each card even if i don't use them in my collection and appreciate the art and history as someone who played WoW since beta. They have made some small changes like a guaranteed legendary at xpac launch, and one in your first 10 packs, and it seems the legendary rate has been slightly upped as during TGT / MSoG i got 4 legends from 120 packs. For KotFT and KoC i got about 10-12 legends for 120 packs each. So there has been small changes ,but not enough to make up for the large cost increases to stay relevant and build any deck you want.
My biggest actual complaint with the game is the community, in-game, and out.
Some level of "internet anonymity asshole syndrome" is to be expected, and exists in every online game I have played, all the way back to MUD's literally decades ago. But HS seems to take it to a new level. 90% of "friend" requests are just to wish cancer on you and your family. Because of this ... it's barely worth the effort to try to add an opponent after a good game, because players are so conditioned to BM, they either don't accept, or when they do, they often jump straight to "what the f*$k do you want?" as an immediate response. Even WoW, which gave you the ability to blast your frustration directly towards other players instantaneously, seemed to have a less caustic community.
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
First of all, you aren't collecting anything. So it really isn't a collector's game at all. You are being TAKEN. Yet the prices are similar to physical collector's games, despite Blizzard not having any production/printing/distribution/sales costs (though they do have more art/programming costs).
Second, box-set games that use cards are not unprecedented. So just because it plays like many other collector's games doesn't mean it can't be a box set. Think about it. Wouldn't the game be WAY healthier if each expansion was just a flat cost and then anyone who wanted to play could, and it would be even for all competitors?
Cost is the third highest complain so far and rewards is second (which is directly related to cost). Clearly it's an issue.
Lack of transparency in that the matchups are allegedly something other than completely random based on current star rank. Bad players should not be handed a favorable matchup due to low win rate/poor performance. Not sure if this is going on, but many claim it is and some defend it with a bogus 50% argument. The game maker needs to make an affirmative statement that it is not, and clean their house if it does. A 3rd party audit would be helpful in this regard.
Free to try and find a game, dealing cards for sorrow, cards for pain.
I hate the rng clown-fiestas 'esports' moments. Lose game because of a 1 in XXX chance. Kthnxbai
Salty players moaning about the game.
Free to try and find a game, dealing cards for sorrow, cards for pain.
I'm still upset at the Deathstalker Rexxar fiasco, which caused to now be suspicious of basically any comment from the developers and suspect ulterior motives.
I'M also fully expecting that they will never actually fix Deathstalker Rexxar and just lead us on by saying "we're working on it, it's gonna take time" to avoid another meltdown (which will probably fail just as horribly as their first attempt to sweep that under the rug)
I tried having fun once. It was awful.
It's gotta be the staleness of the meta. I can't even remember the last time I saw a deck that's not either Cubelock, Aggro Paladin, Raza Priest, or Tempo Rogue in standard. It's been at least several days since I saw anything else at all, and I play quite a few games of hearthstone every day. Sometimes there are slight variations in the Cubelock decks, but the other 3 are pretty much 30/30 the exact same lists every time.
Part of this does fall upon the community and everyone wanting to play just a handful of decks even though you can get away with playing "inferior" decks and only sacrifice one or two percentage points of winrate. But I would say it's mostly Blizzard creating individual cards or synergies so powerful that they become must-build around and invalidate other decks and even other classes entirely.
I regard Cost, Drop Rates, and Dust Cost as basically all part of the same larger issue. I'd say that issue continues to be my biggest complaint, and it only seems to be worsening over time.
My second complaint would be lack of regular balancing, development updates, and up until recently innovation/content, though the latter seems to be getting better thanks to the promise of rewarding PvE content with expansions, as we saw with the last.