Hearthpwn

I think many of us who have problems with netdecking in casual don't have a problem with "netdecking in casual"; we have a problem with the high frequency of netdecks in casual.  

You can't use the argument, "why are you upset about losing in casual, it doesn't affect your rank, just concede and move on," when you have netdecks playing top decks specifically just to get wins.  If winning doesn't matter, why are they  playing netdecks when they could be playing something else?  

No quest has ever asked you to play a top tier netdeck, so that excuse is not valid either.

You can't defend the playing experience and deck choice of netdeckers while simultaneously telling people who don't netdeck that their experience doesn't matter ("who cares if you lose?  just concede.  you can't tell someone else what they can and can't play (but you will lose every game if you yourself don't netdeck)")

Blizzard definitely does pay attention to community feedback. 

The fact that this has gone on for so long and a non zero number of posts is something other than outright celebration and encouragement of casual netdecking shows there is at least some demand and need for an update to this mode (or a new mode entirely).  

IMO if you're still of the opinion that netdecking in casual is totally fine, you either don't play that much casual or you're being willfully ignorant. 

Wow. Haven't seen this thread before...

I think the biggest failure of Hearthstone is the amount of cards that just aren't ever played because they can't compete with an efficient cutthroat netdecks. It would be nice to have a game mode that doesn't allow netdecks and people who want to build their own decks can have some fun playing their "homebrew" decks.

If you don't want to create your own homebrew deck then you could just stick to playing casual with your netdeck.

And if you have a homebrew deck you could have the option to play ranked, casual or homebrew mode 

hearthstone is a card game, that genre alone has a lot of insecure people.
hearthstone is made by blizzard, have you seen most people that play blizzard games at blizzcon or streaming? not exactly the best examples of decent human beings.

and you REALLY expect people not to netdeck in casual? Yea, you are fooling yourself.

Quote from DSchu102285 >>

I think the biggest failure of Hearthstone is the amount of cards that just aren't ever played because they can't compete with an efficient cutthroat netdecks. It would be nice to have a game mode that doesn't allow netdecks and people who want to build their own decks can have some fun playing their "homebrew" decks.

If you don't want to create your own homebrew deck then you could just stick to playing casual with your netdeck.

And if you have a homebrew deck you could have the option to play ranked, casual or homebrew mode 

 

 

Played Yu-Gi-Oh for many many years, some of which was competitive. Most Yu-Gi-Oh cards were also comparatively unplayable, it isn't just a HS thing. I'm sure Magic also shares at least some similarities as well.

The thing is you can NEVER have a game mode without net decks while still also allowing players to construct their own decks (IE not an arena or predetermined TB mode). You could create a new mode that banned the top 100 most consistent/powerful cards across all classes & neutrals and you would still have lists popping up eventually for the most consistent decks for aggro, tempo, midrange, control, combo, & otk. It would just be on a watered down scale. Net decks exist because information sharing is something that you can't prevent (and honestly shouldn't want to if you want a community) and because the game allows player choice. 

as i said, most of us don't care about netdecking casual, we care about the frequency of netdecks in casual.

Quote from Kaladin >>

I think many of us who have problems with netdecking in casual don't have a problem with "netdecking in casual"; we have a problem with the high frequency of netdecks in casual.  

You can't use the argument, "why are you upset about losing in casual, it doesn't affect your rank, just concede and move on," when you have netdecks playing top decks specifically just to get wins.  If winning doesn't matter, why are they  playing netdecks when they could be playing something else?  

No quest has ever asked you to play a top tier netdeck, so that excuse is not valid either.

You can't defend the playing experience and deck choice of netdeckers while simultaneously telling people who don't netdeck that their experience doesn't matter ("who cares if you lose?  just concede.  you can't tell someone else what they can and can't play (but you will lose every game if you yourself don't netdeck)")

Blizzard definitely does pay attention to community feedback. 

The fact that this has gone on for so long and a non zero number of posts is something other than outright celebration and encouragement of casual netdecking shows there is at least some demand and need for an update to this mode (or a new mode entirely).  

IMO if you're still of the opinion that netdecking in casual is totally fine, you either don't play that much casual or you're being willfully ignorant. 

 "No quest has ever asked you to play a top tier netdeck, so that excuse is not valid either." - I'm sorry, but this makes no sense... Why should somebody feel bad for completing his daily quest in casual mode, with he's best deck? And what about newer players, who craft a meta deck but they don't have other cards (I have friends like this)? 

I personally don't play meta decks in casual most of the time, it happens only, when I'm testing a new deck, that I've never played before, and I let my opponent win if he wasn't toxic. I complete my quests in ranked/against friends, but still I feel like, if someone wants to complete he's quest fast, casual is usually perfect for that... and why use a shit deck and play 10 games when you can do the quest in a few games with a better deck?

You need to see both parts... I understand that it is frustrating to play against tier 1 decks in casual, but you need to get used to it... First of all if you want to test your homebrew deck, than it is better to actually see how it works against "Good" decks... if you just want to pull off a stupid combo, than you can play against a friend or the Innkeeper

Quote from TB124 >>

Quote from Kaladin >>

I think many of us who have problems with netdecking in casual don't have a problem with "netdecking in casual"; we have a problem with the high frequency of netdecks in casual.  

You can't use the argument, "why are you upset about losing in casual, it doesn't affect your rank, just concede and move on," when you have netdecks playing top decks specifically just to get wins.  If winning doesn't matter, why are they  playing netdecks when they could be playing something else?  

No quest has ever asked you to play a top tier netdeck, so that excuse is not valid either.

You can't defend the playing experience and deck choice of netdeckers while simultaneously telling people who don't netdeck that their experience doesn't matter ("who cares if you lose?  just concede.  you can't tell someone else what they can and can't play (but you will lose every game if you yourself don't netdeck)")

Blizzard definitely does pay attention to community feedback. 

The fact that this has gone on for so long and a non zero number of posts is something other than outright celebration and encouragement of casual netdecking shows there is at least some demand and need for an update to this mode (or a new mode entirely).  

IMO if you're still of the opinion that netdecking in casual is totally fine, you either don't play that much casual or you're being willfully ignorant. 

 "No quest has ever asked you to play a top tier netdeck, so that excuse is not valid either." - I'm sorry, but this makes no sense... Why should somebody feel bad for completing his daily quest in casual mode, with he's best deck? And what about newer players, who craft a meta deck but they don't have other cards (I have friends like this)? 

I personally don't play meta decks in casual most of the time, it happens only, when I'm testing a new deck, that I've never played before, and I let my opponent win if he wasn't toxic. I complete my quests in ranked/against friends, but still I feel like, if someone wants to complete he's quest fast, casual is usually perfect for that... and why use a shit deck and play 10 games when you can do the quest in a few games with a better deck?

You need to see both parts... I understand that it is frustrating to play against tier 1 decks in casual, but you need to get used to it... First of all if you want to test your homebrew deck, than it is better to actually see how it works against "Good" decks... if you just want to pull off a stupid combo, than you can play against a friend or the Innkeeper

 No quest says "play big hand mage in casual," that's my point.  You might have "win 3 games with mage" but surely there are other decks that can win in casual besides that.

I don't play casual and make homebrew decks to see how well they'd stack up against ladder decks.  If I did, there's actually a great place to test that out. Perhaps you've heard of ladder?

Quote from Lyra_Silvertongue >>

Quote from DSchu102285 >>

I think the biggest failure of Hearthstone is the amount of cards that just aren't ever played because they can't compete with an efficient cutthroat netdecks. It would be nice to have a game mode that doesn't allow netdecks and people who want to build their own decks can have some fun playing their "homebrew" decks.

If you don't want to create your own homebrew deck then you could just stick to playing casual with your netdeck.

And if you have a homebrew deck you could have the option to play ranked, casual or homebrew mode 

 

 

Played Yu-Gi-Oh for many many years, some of which was competitive. Most Yu-Gi-Oh cards were also comparatively unplayable, it isn't just a HS thing. I'm sure Magic also shares at least some similarities as well.

The thing is you can NEVER have a game mode without net decks while still also allowing players to construct their own decks (IE not an arena or predetermined TB mode). You could create a new mode that banned the top 100 most consistent/powerful cards across all classes & neutrals and you would still have lists popping up eventually for the most consistent decks for aggro, tempo, midrange, control, combo, & otk. It would just be on a watered down scale. Net decks exist because information sharing is something that you can't prevent (and honestly shouldn't want to if you want a community) and because the game allows player choice. 

 Of course, there would be netdecks in a homebrew game mode. I never suggested such a game mode would eliminate netdecking. The only difference is that a homebrew game mode could be regulated so essentially all the homebrew decks can exist in a game mode where people can play their fun decks, get better value out of their card collection while also facing decks that aren't optimized competitive tier 1 netdecks.

I think the point that it's the frequency of top tier decks in casual which frustrates new players or people just trying to complete quests.

This I would agree with because Casual should be a mode in which you are playing without the pressure of losing or winning.

Part of the issue is that some of the quests are tied to winning.  Funny enough, when I get quests that are tied to winning, I go on ladder because I know I will have an easier time.  My rank hovers around 15 on ladder so I know that I will face a variety of decks giving me a chance at free wins.

When I go into casual though, I have no idea what I will be facing and if the player knows what they are doing or if they created an account yesterday.  I also don't like to go into casual because my refined deck will usually stomp the starter decks.  I don't find that rewarding for either player.

I go into casual for 2 main reasons.  To complete a particularly annoying quest that I know will lose in ladder OR I am testing out a new deck and I want to see how consistent it is against a real opponent.

I think someone above countered the argument of creating a 'watered-down' format where you ban all top tier cards would just create another meta with lesser known cards.  That is true in part, but is that such a bad thing?  Hear me out.

I think Casual SHOULD be a place where top tier decks should NOT be allowed.  Take the top tier decks (or deck recipes) and if your deck has more than 75% of the same cards of those top tier decks, you CANNOT play in Casual.  The message would be 'Your deck is far too competitive for Casual mode.  Please remove some cards.'  You can even have a button in which it says 'Convert to Casual'.  Then the Casual Convert option would remove a few cards and replace them with lesser known or lesser used cards.

The lesser known cards would start to be used.  Sure a second meta would form in Casual, but I say good.  Let that happen with lesser known cards.  Let's have our Magma Rager's take front stage for once.  You know that spell that no one plays with, well everyone will in Casual.

This can be a very positive step for Casual and Free to Play players.  You can actually measure your level of progression and feel pride.  Pride that your Casual deck and pathetic collection has risen to the status of Competitive.  Once a F2P player gets that message of 'Your deck is far too competitive for Casual', then they know they made it.  They have a deck that can finally compete on ladder.

If you want to farm gold or quests, you have that right, but Blizzard can make it harder and MUCH friendlier to newer players or players wanting to experiment with new cards.  That is THE point of Casual.  NOT Ladder 2.0 for people who hate to lose to people on ladder.

Great point, it's really a benefit to the HS community that we have a mode where top tier decks are played and instead of complaining, players can study games, examine their deck, and put something together that makes tech choices to counter the meta.   I'm really glad such a mode exists.  

Quote from user-14157642 >>

Blizzard will never do this. Never in a million years.

A game mode like this would make the game a lot easier to enjoy for free players. Do you understand why that is not in Blizzard's best interest?

Hearthstone is not meant to be played for free in the long term. The only way Hearthstone exists is by converting free players to paying players, and to keep those players paying.

Without the incentive to buy more cards, the game would die immediately.

Kaladin's plan would work great if Hearthstone used a Living Card Game business model, where you pay a flat rate to get all the cards in a set, but that's not the model they chose.

Really? So a one-time payment probably wouldn't be enough. But a subscription model like WoW? People would still need to buy the cards so I'm not sure if it makes it better for free players even when accessible with gold. I guess it depends a lot of how it's implemented. It's also important to note that this isn't necessarily about Blizzard and how they chose to do things. I would be happy if someone else made a similar game but with even more focus on the casual aspect and maybe even go as far as do it with only crowdfunding.

The point was that I also would love such a "sandbox mode". And maybe it can be implemented by them if they do a subscription model. Or what else would be your suggestion how they "can afford" to implement something like this?

 Have you tried Faeria?

Quote from FortyDust >>

Quote from user-14157642 >>

Blizzard will never do this. Never in a million years.

A game mode like this would make the game a lot easier to enjoy for free players. Do you understand why that is not in Blizzard's best interest?

Hearthstone is not meant to be played for free in the long term. The only way Hearthstone exists is by converting free players to paying players, and to keep those players paying.

Without the incentive to buy more cards, the game would die immediately.

Kaladin's plan would work great if Hearthstone used a Living Card Game business model, where you pay a flat rate to get all the cards in a set, but that's not the model they chose.

Really? So a one-time payment probably wouldn't be enough. But a subscription model like WoW? People would still need to buy the cards so I'm not sure if it makes it better for free players even when accessible with gold. I guess it depends a lot of how it's implemented. It's also important to note that this isn't necessarily about Blizzard and how they chose to do things. I would be happy if someone else made a similar game but with even more focus on the casual aspect and maybe even go as far as do it with only crowdfunding.

The point was that I also would love such a "sandbox mode". And maybe it can be implemented by them if they do a subscription model. Or what else would be your suggestion how they "can afford" to implement something like this?

 Have you tried Faeria?

 I play Faeria sometimes. Back when I played a lot I used to have a Y/Rush deck featured on their website for "strong beginner decks" along with Hunters B/G Beasts. To have a deck featured with such a great player was an honour. 

I'm behind on expacs though. need to buy the last couple of them and get caught up. such an amazing game. 

now it's going to switch as well, I think the game will get bigger. 

Have you tried Faeria?

I've heard of it. But it's way different from what I know. A big thing with those similar games is so often less RNG. Unfortunately for me that's one of the reasons I really like Hearthstone. It depends on what you're looking for, but I just play for fun. Is there something like Yogg in Faeria? Something like Discover? How about the Burgle Rogue archetype? Witch's Cauldron? I don't think so. As I said it's just way too different. It has a lot of interesting things as well going for it, but overall doesn't seem particularly fun to me.

No, consider it more like chess/checkers...Strategy matters, less rng.

No, consider it more like chess/checkers...Strategy matters, less rng.

Exactly. I don't play Hearthstone because of its similarities to chess. I play it for things like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pQ8ahlf4tPc

To the ones stating that one good excuse for playing netdecks in casual is completing some particularly annoying quests, like "play 30 murlocs" I suppose, for instance: you do all now that you can reroll one quest per day by clicking on the button in your mission log, right?

So please find another one.

And to the ones defending newbies and their one and only, hard-earned, tier-1 deck: What's the use of crafting a top ladder deck if you never actually take it to ladder itself?

Let's just call them by their name, will we? Honourless douches farming gold. Nothing else.

As I think more about it  my impression is that Blizzard actively encourages netdecking.  You really dont need to look further than the new deck creation mechanics to see that they are happy with people only exploring what the meta declares relevant.  

I think, then, there are really two ways to look at this:  1) you could be upset when you run into a netdeck in casual, and never know whether the player actually in fact pulled some T1 deck from here or if they simply hit 'complete deck' in their collection;  or 2) You could consider that to be the default, and celebrate the special occasions you run into someone playing something genuinely novel.