Every time I hop onto this site, I scroll to the top news in hopes of seeing a balance change announcement. Plenty of time has passed for Blizzard to realize the need to nerf at least one Cubelock component, Spiteful Summoner, and potentially Call to Arms.
We shouldn’t have to be forced to slog through a 6th consecutive month of Cubelocks and Aggro Pally’s dominating the top tier and Spiteful decks highrolling their way to the bottom of tier 1/top of tier 2.
The problem cards should have been changed in preparation of the Witchwood release, but instead they waited to see if the new cards and rotation would push these decks down. It didn’t. It’s time to implement the changes.
You do realize than even if they nerf all your mentionned cards, an other Tier 1 deck will emerge and take the palladin's place. Seriously Guys, Cubelock is an easy wins with a lot of powerful deck right now.
I don't think the meta is unbalanced, but it seems more swingy. Firebat commented on the recent Value Town episode that there are a variety of strong decks, and they either win strong or lose hard. In many cases you know you've lost as soon as you know what deck your playing. I've had more early concedes this expansion than I can recall... though I am human and have been playing since beta. So, it's possible I'm sensing it's worse than it is.
When your deck is slightly unfavored, then clever play can squeeze out a win. When you deck is hugely unfavored, you just lose. The reverse is also true. If your deck is slightly favored, then your opponent has a chance to outsmart you. If your deck is hugely favored, you just play cards and win.
I personally enjoy the meta more when decks are 55/45 or 60/40 against each other instead of 75/25. You have to be on your toes.
I forgot that having an opinion isn't allowed outside of the salt thread.
Having some frequent updates and balancing to cards would only make the game feel fresher and more cards would see play. I don't see why people are defending Blizzard on this, it's something normal for pretty much all multiplayer games,
Patent, whiny nonsense. I also asked OP for what is "so unbalanced'. Crickets. Have your opinion. But back it up with more than "it's so imba, OMFG, why is Blizz so bad, lululwhine".
Again, what's whiny about expecting a couple of updates now and then to change up the metagame a little? Are people afraid of this because they would need to craft cards they don't own or can't play the current tier 1 lists forever? The whining about the metagame is one thing, it will never be balanced, but Blizzard has a lot of options when it comes to doing small things to keep things fresh for more than the first week of every expansion. Rotating some cards in and out could be a good idea. People are so defensive.
The game is balanced. There are some good cards, some bad cards. There are some good decks and some bad decks. That is balance. HS is a card game. Some cards are stronger than others. That's never going away. If you don't like it then HS is not the game for you. But really, 95% of the community complains about a strong card for 24 hours a day, seriously, the game is a better place without you! 'Oh my god, nerf this please'. 'Oh my god, too strong, screw Blizzard'. It's pathetic.
I know a balance game when I see one and this isnt it, but telling me I should leave the game because I think the game isnt balanced is silly. THATS HOW GAMES DIE! You think pally is balanced? You think cubelock is the definition of balanced? How much is blizzard paying you?
Guys whats is so bad about a expecting updates and consistent balance from the company you give your money to? How can anyone defend this balance team? These are the same people who nerfed hex when it wasnt even being played or a problem card. I shouldn't be expected to play against the same broken cards for 4+ months before something is done about it.
I think the meta right now is not fun. There are a lot of matchups that are nearly unwinnable and are auto-concede. That is because there are cards like spiteful ,lackey or call to arms which are breaking the game balance. At the same time we have quest rogue which is most of the time an auto-loss for every slow deck because you cant disrupt their combo. The cube is also a big problem because is enables ridiculous combos witch other deathrattle minions (taunt druid) or charge minions. If the meta feels good or balanced may be dependent on your point of view. I like playing control decks and i am very annoyed by quest-rogue or strategies that only aim to kill you as fast as possible. Where is the fun if you have 30 cards in your deck and the game ends turn 6 while you played 5 cards? Also in long games the skill of the players does matter more because you can make more decisions and in these in short matches its luck that decides if you have a good answer on hand.
Again, what's whiny about expecting a couple of updates now and then to change up the metagame a little? Are people afraid of this because they would need to craft cards they don't own or can't play the current tier 1 lists forever? The whining about the metagame is one thing, it will never be balanced, but Blizzard has a lot of options when it comes to doing small things to keep things fresh for more than the first week of every expansion. Rotating some cards in and out could be a good idea. People are so defensive.
Defensive implies that I have skin in the game regarding Blizzard's reputation, which I don't. What I am doing is calling out the predictable, cyclical bitching that comes when some people can't solve the meta game in every single expansion.
What exactly is it that needs to be changed at this point? This is the question that I consistently ask folks who seem to have this opinion and generally the answer is 'nerf this thing I don't like'. When I ask them why, they rarely come up with anything better than 'because I don't like it'. So, please, prove me wrong.
And no. People generally aren't afraid of those sorts of things. The people who are on the upper tiers, as is, usually have the dust to craft whatever they please within reason.
You keep talking about all these 'little options' that Blizzard has. They're not going to do any more rotation than they already have via Hall of Fame. Why not suggest something a tad more realistic?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
A never-Legend Dad who keeps making rank 2 or 1, but then sliding.
Rumbling around Gurubashi Arena. Shirvallah is the best loa. Go Tigers!
Some good thoughts in this thread. A cry for "balance" normally come up when someone's (a) favorite class and/or (b) favorite play style is particularly weak in the current meta. If you love Priest, you more than likely had no problem with Razakus opression; if you love Shaman, you more than likely had no problem with Shamanstone, etc. I also think there was expected watering down of the previous strong decks from last year when the rotation happened, but the power level from last year is so high those decks are still around and even stronger, which can be very frustrating, especially if you don't care for the class.
That said, something has to be done about the mana cheating mechanics of this game. Possessed Lackey, Skull, Call To Arms, Spiteful Summoner, all "cheat" one of the most fundamental design aspects of the game - controlled mana curve. At least with a mana cheat class like Druid/Innervate, they could balance the cards around the fact. As it stands, a turn 6 with 16/16 worth of stats to deal with, or a turn 6 with a battlecry free Doomguard that gets cubed/pacted leading to 15 instant damage is just ridiculous.
Guys whats is so bad about a expecting updates and consistent balance from the company you give your money to? How can anyone defend this balance team? These are the same people who nerfed hex when it wasnt even being played or a problem card. I shouldn't be expected to play against the same broken cards for 4+ months before something is done about it.
Because you literally can't even explain what balance looks like to you. I don't say this as an accusation, I say it as a statement of fact that suits the pattern of what I'm reading. You can't demonstrate what would actually appease you. So it reads like baseless, pointless shrieking.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
A never-Legend Dad who keeps making rank 2 or 1, but then sliding.
Rumbling around Gurubashi Arena. Shirvallah is the best loa. Go Tigers!
I agree with the subtext of the thread's title. Updating, rebalancing, cards should be on Blizzard's timetable. It either happens too slow, and it's only happening when "meta" is problematic. If updating some cards would be a reaccuring thing, i.e. in the beginning of each month, everyone will know that it's happening, it will be something that's woven into "how HS works". It will be part of HS in the way other timetabled stuff occur, like new years (kraken, raven), like weekly tavern brawls, fireside gatherings etc. Now more specifically, why is this a good idea?
0. First of all: The philosophy in a card game like this can never be to strive for "perfect balance". As several community members have stated already: it is not possible. (Unless you have a philosophy on what "balance" means.) So far, my interpretation, of HS change philosophy concerns FUN, GAME SPACE DESIGN and LADDER CLIMBING. FUN usually translates in versatility and rng. GAME SPACE DESIGN translates into that bad cards will be replaced by new ones in future OR get a new chance when other new cards let them. LADDER CLIMBING concerns with balance for competative stuff. This is pretty ok/good, but card change policy could be even more clear and profond. As it is now, HS team, seems a bit reactive and changes are based on what's "problematic". The philosophy of changing card could extend/meld more into the feel of HS, that concerns with seasons, tournaments, the feel of a cozy tavern as a place (where COMMUNITY is one key word). Etc.
1. CARD CHANGES EACH MONTH: Changing a few cards (emphasis on few, and very slightly) in the beginning of each month keep the game fresh and dynamic: every player needs to rethink, refresh their attitude each month, some new cards might see the light etc. Each month becomes a slightly new experience, has a game "texture" of its own. (If one is really design nerdy, this could be linked with card back somehow. But absolutely not necessary.)
2. BROADER TARGETS FOR CARD CHANGES: For instance, changes should not just target cards that are "problematic"/"meta-defining", but it could also target the card that is the most impopular OR a card that the design team like to add a new flavor too. Maybe in collaboration with community somehow, through votes (boring), or in collaboration with professional players or someone that has the most wins in a specific tavern brawl. I don't know, tons of ways of doing this. I mean, for instance: how many threads aren't about making "warsong commander" (a bit) better again. It could be COMMUNITY PLEASING (or PROVOKING?)...
...making it a 3/3 or whatever won't be a great deal... Yes, there is the argument (Brode kept saying it) that there is going to be new expansions and the focus should be on that. and keep the "design space" as open as possible, improvement would come in new cards etc... I DISAGREE: each card has a story and bring a feel to the game. Honoring that, and honoring 1 card each month by slightly making adjustments to it would aesthetically be interesting. I would be more curious about WW lore, about maybe using the cards again, maybe wonder about how HS team design dreams are etc. Potentially, in some of the HS players mind, putting a spot light on old cards, even the ones that doesn't change. That would create a certain added "spirit" to the game (next to tavern brawls, monster hunts, festivals, years etc. which are fantastic.). It adds to different game design strategies that keeps the game alive. Whereas now there is a tendency that too many cards just are thrown into the closet never to see the light of game play again (although HS team is good at designing cards that make you look back, this is not enough, and in the long run... well.). I also understand that new expansions means more money, and that's how the world goes around blah blah, but this doesn't contradict that.
Otherwise HS is a great game, and they create a larger and larger game environment that is appealing. Also, I like to thank Haussenfuss's earlier post. It is a beautiful statement, bringing interesting facts to the table.
There are a lot of decks out there, but it's basically the same thing over and over again.
Hyper-slow control decks kicking every other control deck out of the game because of busted cube interactions. Super-polarized coin flip against Quest Rogue. Aggro aggro aggro decided by mulligan and first three draws luck. Combo decks you can't play around and can beat only if they don't draw their pieces.
There's almost no midrange anymore, THIS is the hint of a broken game.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
English isn't my first language, so please excuse any mistakes.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I don't think the meta is unbalanced, but it seems more swingy. Firebat commented on the recent Value Town episode that there are a variety of strong decks, and they either win strong or lose hard. In many cases you know you've lost as soon as you know what deck your playing. I've had more early concedes this expansion than I can recall... though I am human and have been playing since beta. So, it's possible I'm sensing it's worse than it is.
When your deck is slightly unfavored, then clever play can squeeze out a win. When you deck is hugely unfavored, you just lose. The reverse is also true. If your deck is slightly favored, then your opponent has a chance to outsmart you. If your deck is hugely favored, you just play cards and win.
I personally enjoy the meta more when decks are 55/45 or 60/40 against each other instead of 75/25. You have to be on your toes.
Anyone expecting blizzard to balance this game is clearly new to it. They are pretty openly against balance.
Guys whats is so bad about a expecting updates and consistent balance from the company you give your money to? How can anyone defend this balance team? These are the same people who nerfed hex when it wasnt even being played or a problem card. I shouldn't be expected to play against the same broken cards for 4+ months before something is done about it.
I think the meta right now is not fun. There are a lot of matchups that are nearly unwinnable and are auto-concede. That is because there are cards like spiteful ,lackey or call to arms which are breaking the game balance. At the same time we have quest rogue which is most of the time an auto-loss for every slow deck because you cant disrupt their combo. The cube is also a big problem because is enables ridiculous combos witch other deathrattle minions (taunt druid) or charge minions. If the meta feels good or balanced may be dependent on your point of view. I like playing control decks and i am very annoyed by quest-rogue or strategies that only aim to kill you as fast as possible. Where is the fun if you have 30 cards in your deck and the game ends turn 6 while you played 5 cards? Also in long games the skill of the players does matter more because you can make more decisions and in these in short matches its luck that decides if you have a good answer on hand.
Defensive implies that I have skin in the game regarding Blizzard's reputation, which I don't. What I am doing is calling out the predictable, cyclical bitching that comes when some people can't solve the meta game in every single expansion.
What exactly is it that needs to be changed at this point? This is the question that I consistently ask folks who seem to have this opinion and generally the answer is 'nerf this thing I don't like'. When I ask them why, they rarely come up with anything better than 'because I don't like it'. So, please, prove me wrong.
And no. People generally aren't afraid of those sorts of things. The people who are on the upper tiers, as is, usually have the dust to craft whatever they please within reason.
You keep talking about all these 'little options' that Blizzard has. They're not going to do any more rotation than they already have via Hall of Fame. Why not suggest something a tad more realistic?
A never-Legend Dad who keeps making rank 2 or 1, but then sliding.
Rumbling around Gurubashi Arena. Shirvallah is the best loa. Go Tigers!
Some good thoughts in this thread. A cry for "balance" normally come up when someone's (a) favorite class and/or (b) favorite play style is particularly weak in the current meta. If you love Priest, you more than likely had no problem with Razakus opression; if you love Shaman, you more than likely had no problem with Shamanstone, etc. I also think there was expected watering down of the previous strong decks from last year when the rotation happened, but the power level from last year is so high those decks are still around and even stronger, which can be very frustrating, especially if you don't care for the class.
That said, something has to be done about the mana cheating mechanics of this game. Possessed Lackey, Skull, Call To Arms, Spiteful Summoner, all "cheat" one of the most fundamental design aspects of the game - controlled mana curve. At least with a mana cheat class like Druid/Innervate, they could balance the cards around the fact. As it stands, a turn 6 with 16/16 worth of stats to deal with, or a turn 6 with a battlecry free Doomguard that gets cubed/pacted leading to 15 instant damage is just ridiculous.
A never-Legend Dad who keeps making rank 2 or 1, but then sliding.
Rumbling around Gurubashi Arena. Shirvallah is the best loa. Go Tigers!
I agree with the subtext of the thread's title. Updating, rebalancing, cards should be on Blizzard's timetable. It either happens too slow, and it's only happening when "meta" is problematic. If updating some cards would be a reaccuring thing, i.e. in the beginning of each month, everyone will know that it's happening, it will be something that's woven into "how HS works". It will be part of HS in the way other timetabled stuff occur, like new years (kraken, raven), like weekly tavern brawls, fireside gatherings etc. Now more specifically, why is this a good idea?
0. First of all: The philosophy in a card game like this can never be to strive for "perfect balance". As several community members have stated already: it is not possible. (Unless you have a philosophy on what "balance" means.) So far, my interpretation, of HS change philosophy concerns FUN, GAME SPACE DESIGN and LADDER CLIMBING. FUN usually translates in versatility and rng. GAME SPACE DESIGN translates into that bad cards will be replaced by new ones in future OR get a new chance when other new cards let them. LADDER CLIMBING concerns with balance for competative stuff. This is pretty ok/good, but card change policy could be even more clear and profond. As it is now, HS team, seems a bit reactive and changes are based on what's "problematic". The philosophy of changing card could extend/meld more into the feel of HS, that concerns with seasons, tournaments, the feel of a cozy tavern as a place (where COMMUNITY is one key word). Etc.
1. CARD CHANGES EACH MONTH: Changing a few cards (emphasis on few, and very slightly) in the beginning of each month keep the game fresh and dynamic: every player needs to rethink, refresh their attitude each month, some new cards might see the light etc. Each month becomes a slightly new experience, has a game "texture" of its own. (If one is really design nerdy, this could be linked with card back somehow. But absolutely not necessary.)
2. BROADER TARGETS FOR CARD CHANGES: For instance, changes should not just target cards that are "problematic"/"meta-defining", but it could also target the card that is the most impopular OR a card that the design team like to add a new flavor too. Maybe in collaboration with community somehow, through votes (boring), or in collaboration with professional players or someone that has the most wins in a specific tavern brawl. I don't know, tons of ways of doing this. I mean, for instance: how many threads aren't about making "warsong commander" (a bit) better again. It could be COMMUNITY PLEASING (or PROVOKING?)...
...making it a 3/3 or whatever won't be a great deal... Yes, there is the argument (Brode kept saying it) that there is going to be new expansions and the focus should be on that. and keep the "design space" as open as possible, improvement would come in new cards etc... I DISAGREE: each card has a story and bring a feel to the game. Honoring that, and honoring 1 card each month by slightly making adjustments to it would aesthetically be interesting. I would be more curious about WW lore, about maybe using the cards again, maybe wonder about how HS team design dreams are etc. Potentially, in some of the HS players mind, putting a spot light on old cards, even the ones that doesn't change. That would create a certain added "spirit" to the game (next to tavern brawls, monster hunts, festivals, years etc. which are fantastic.). It adds to different game design strategies that keeps the game alive. Whereas now there is a tendency that too many cards just are thrown into the closet never to see the light of game play again (although HS team is good at designing cards that make you look back, this is not enough, and in the long run... well.). I also understand that new expansions means more money, and that's how the world goes around blah blah, but this doesn't contradict that.
Otherwise HS is a great game, and they create a larger and larger game environment that is appealing. Also, I like to thank Haussenfuss's earlier post. It is a beautiful statement, bringing interesting facts to the table.
There are a lot of decks out there, but it's basically the same thing over and over again.
Hyper-slow control decks kicking every other control deck out of the game because of busted cube interactions.
Super-polarized coin flip against Quest Rogue.
Aggro aggro aggro decided by mulligan and first three draws luck.
Combo decks you can't play around and can beat only if they don't draw their pieces.
There's almost no midrange anymore, THIS is the hint of a broken game.
English isn't my first language, so please excuse any mistakes.