Hello everyone, I've been thinking on how to improve the long periods between expansions in hearthstone.
First: instead of calling each year a "year of the kraken" "year of the mammoth" etc call them year of (expansion name) or just the expansion
It will then be 1 year of ONLY that expansion In the beginning of the year the devs make around 200 cards or something and after a month or so
ADD WEEKLY CARDS!
Basically: each weekend or wednesday with the tavern brawl reset, add 1-2 5 10 cards as many as they want that are inspired by the expansion
For example with the new Rastakhan xpac:
they release it and after a month so january they start adding small cards maybe a troll inspired minion or a new version of hex and maybe each month they add 1 new legendary together with the other cards this makes something like 30 cards per month that are added.
They also don't need to make the expacs last for the full year maybe half of the year whatever
BUT JUST ADD WEEKLY OR MONTHLY CARDS
P.S. Sorry if this is sloppy or rambly i just enjoy throwing out my ideas like that w/o too much thinking and sometimes i think of new things during my rambles and add them so dont be scared by the weird format and dont be toxic in comments
Also i ve trademarked this idea so y all cant copy it (cough Kripp cough)
Adding a small number of cards will not significantly change the Meta.
That depends more on the cards, really. Adding Baku or Genn by themselves would do more than adding almost the entire rest of the WW expansion.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Start of Year: Provoke the failure of 3 expansions, force nerfs on otherwise balanced cards, bring deckbuilding to an all-time low and get rotated one year earlier for being such a threat to the game's health. - Genn and Baku's historical entry on the White Book of Shit Design, shortly before retiring unpunished
The problem isn't content droughts. It's stale content, namely the entire evergreen set. The data out there suggest that at any given time throughout the year, the meta is more than 40% classic and basic cards. How can your refresh period not touch almost half the meta and expect to actually refresh anything? We have several old expansions to pull cards from now and the possibility to create a yearly rotating core set. Magic has proven that it works. Not only would it allow stale cards to leave and bring new life into the game but rotating old cards back in allows for Blizzard to update the art. That is what this game needs so bad.
The other thing I want to state is this. Hearthstone's card design quality is absolutely abysmal. The amount of cards that are simply nonviable at every point in their life span in standard is much higher than the amount of cards that actually find a home in tier 4 or above decks. Hearthstone feels creatively bankrupt.
As I see the new cards revealed, everyone is rushing to comment on whether these cards are good or bad, but I think that discussion is meaningless. The discussion we should be having is whether these cards are fun or not. How do these new cards offer new ways to play? In my opinion, that is what matters in a time where good and bad cards already exist but fun is the problem. So I ask you, where is the fun in the new cards? The last honest to god fun card was Academic Espionage and Blizzard ensured that it wasn't good enough to be competitive. If Hearthstone is to succeed it needs to put fun first. Right now, Team 5 is not doing that and that is why Hearthstone is stale.
The problem isn't content droughts. It's stale content, namely the entire evergreen set. The data out there suggest that at any given time throughout the year, the meta is more than 40% classic and basic cards. How can your refresh period not touch almost half the meta and expect to actually refresh anything? We have several old expansions to pull cards from now and the possibility to create a yearly rotating core set. Magic has proven that it works. Not only would it allow stale cards to leave and bring new life into the game but rotating old cards back in allows for Blizzard to update the art. That is what this game needs so bad.
The other thing I want to state is this. Hearthstone's card design quality is absolutely abysmal. The amount of cards that are simply nonviable at every point in their life span in standard is much higher than the amount of cards that actually find a home in tier 4 or above decks. Hearthstone feels creatively bankrupt.
As I see the new cards revealed, everyone is rushing to comment on whether these cards are good or bad, but I think that discussion is meaningless. The discussion we should be having is whether these cards are fun or not. How do these new cards offer new ways to play? In my opinion, that is what matters in a time where good and bad cards already exist but fun is the problem. So I ask you, where is the fun in the new cards? The last honest to god fun card was Academic Espionage and Blizzard ensured that it wasn't good enough to be competitive. If Hearthstone is to succeed it needs to put fun first. Right now, Team 5 is not doing that and that is why Hearthstone is stale.
This. People rush to say “how does this fit into my copy-paste netdeck”? instead of “how can this card bring new archetypes and refreshed joy to the game?
I really don’t understand why people still think HS is a competitive game. It’s really a meme game and meme decks are the best way to bring out the excitement. And that’s ok. I love HS for the memes, but I don’t t kid myself by thinking it’s competitove or that rank makes any difference. I play MTG for a skill-based challenge. HS is more meme-based and that’s it’s too charm.
Not going into the effects of the idea itself (hint, very little change week to week and much more staleness), this would murder the economic model for Blizzard. How do you make packs for this? Are you assured the newer cards or do I have to open packs of stuff I already have to hope and get the recently added cards?
They would need to smash the current pack/dust system to attempt this.
It's not a matter of quantity but a matter of quality. Here is the thing: the game is meant to be played casually, the more you play the faster will figure it out and the sooner you will reach the stale phase. This is the direction they took years ago and it won't change as it is the most profitable.
You do not believe me? Just see all existing decks in the current meta which is one of good metas we had. There are 3 to 4 decks with multiple reskins as was the previous meta and the meta before it.As long as the cards have 0 actual complexity or depth and we do not get to interact during opponent's turn the game will always feel stale.
You see most people confuse of having different decks with having different experience. There can be 100 different viable decks that play the same and there can be 10 different decks that make every game play out differently. But as i said this will make the game more complex so it won't happen.
Adding a small number of cards will not significantly change the Meta.
Reno Jackson, Genn, Baku, Gul'Dan, Tunnel Trogg, Kingsbane, Juicy Psychmelon all say hi.
The quantity of the cards is mostly irrelevant. Make a single card with strong synergy with existing cards and bam you broke the meta.
Ask the community and yourself, do you WANT a weekly card that's so powerful it warps the meta like Genn/baku/Reno/ext does? You want to see what happens to all of the rest of the cards when you regularly introduce meta breaking cards? Saw how overused Giggling was? That's the problem with power creep. And that's what will happen with each weekly card: it'll not just change the meta, but the meta will revolve around it. Every deck that can use the card will use it and every deck that can't will be less used.
This is less of an issue with an expansion since you can add multiple high impact cards so that multiple classes and decks can develop. Them, along with counter decks and older decks that gain a resurgence, will create a new meta.
ONE card, though, will either be weak enough to not matter or strong enough to be yet another overused giggling. What's worse, it WON'T be able to make a new deck since it won't come with other cards to create synergy. That means the card MUST be usable with old decks (thus it'll be old deck + new thing) to see play. Again, see how giggling didn't make new decks, just empowered old ones.
Then you get to class issues. Were you guys around during the Adventures? Is there anyone who remember Naxx when Warlocks and Hunters exploded for 2 weeks since key cards were given early on, mages were in the crapper until they blew up a few weeks later, and Paladins had to wait 4 week for a card that would be deemed a dumpster fire for the next year?
Shaman getting crappy ice powers in Frozen throne gets mitigated when they get a pretty cool Death Knight in the same expansion. Rogue was given overall crap except for Blink Fox, which didn't REALLY help, but that was fine since Baku and a few key neutrals were all they needed. Priest was given Purify and had nothing else to play with since it was in an Adventure and there were few cards to work with so there was no room for meme play-play cards.
We moved away from Adventures for a darn good reason. If you don't remember them or you're under rose colored glasses nostalgia about them, just trust me, they are best long gone. Solutions to HS' problems will need to come elsewhere.
Having the meta change every week is a terrible idea. Imagine the difficulties Blizzard would have in ensuring that the meta stays balanced from week to week, and the problems players would have in making crafting decisions. You will have lots of players complaining that they can't decide whether to invest in a particular deck, because who knows how the meta will change next week with the addition of new cards?
I do agree, however, that 3 expansions a year is too few and results in long stretches of stale meta. I think there should be 3 big expansions a year and 2 smaller sets (of around 20-35 cards each) released between each expansion. That way there will be fresh cards every 2-2.5 months instead of every 4 months.
Adding a small number of cards will not significantly change the Meta.
That depends more on the cards, really. Adding Baku or Genn by themselves would do more than adding almost the entire rest of the WW expansion.
So you are suggesting monthly power creep. Bad idea. Incredibly bad.
I didn't suggest jack. All I did was point out that your refutal was invalid and explain why. I agreed with Trollbert as soon as I read his post, which also disagrees with the OP.
Still, bad or niche cards being added can do a lot. I remember Marin the Fox shaking up the meta a bit, and he did not powercreep anything.
There's no need to assume Blizzard can only either add Worgen Greasers or Jade Idols to the game. There are middle grounds in terms of power and interesting mechanics.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Start of Year: Provoke the failure of 3 expansions, force nerfs on otherwise balanced cards, bring deckbuilding to an all-time low and get rotated one year earlier for being such a threat to the game's health. - Genn and Baku's historical entry on the White Book of Shit Design, shortly before retiring unpunished
The problem isn't with how often we get content, it's how often the top decks in the meta change. Right now we get about 6 changes a year (3 expansions and 3 balance changes), but how often do we see changes at the top of the meta? It's a fine line to balance an expansion so that it impacts the meta enough to get rid of the staleness without making old deck unplayable, and Blizzard has been pretty hit-or-miss with that. The change needed isn't more card releases, it is more consistent quality of card releases.
Update: They just added 4 new cards in classic mode so I can now say I predicted this
What? xD
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Start of Year: Provoke the failure of 3 expansions, force nerfs on otherwise balanced cards, bring deckbuilding to an all-time low and get rotated one year earlier for being such a threat to the game's health. - Genn and Baku's historical entry on the White Book of Shit Design, shortly before retiring unpunished
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Hello everyone, I've been thinking on how to improve the long periods between expansions in hearthstone.
First: instead of calling each year a "year of the kraken" "year of the mammoth" etc
call them year of (expansion name) or just the expansion
It will then be 1 year of ONLY that expansion
In the beginning of the year the devs make around 200 cards or something and after a month or so
ADD WEEKLY CARDS!
Basically: each weekend or wednesday with the tavern brawl reset, add 1-2 5 10 cards as many as they want that are inspired by the expansion
For example with the new Rastakhan xpac:
they release it and after a month so january they start adding small cards maybe a troll inspired minion or a new version of hex
and maybe each month they add 1 new legendary together with the other cards
this makes something like 30 cards per month that are added.
They also don't need to make the expacs last for the full year maybe half of the year whatever
BUT JUST ADD WEEKLY OR MONTHLY CARDS
P.S. Sorry if this is sloppy or rambly i just enjoy throwing out my ideas like that w/o too much thinking and sometimes i think of new things during my rambles and add them so dont be scared by the weird format and dont be toxic in comments
Also i ve trademarked this idea so y all cant copy it (cough Kripp cough)
Adding a small number of cards will not significantly change the Meta.
That depends more on the cards, really. Adding Baku or Genn by themselves would do more than adding almost the entire rest of the WW expansion.
Start of Year: Provoke the failure of 3 expansions, force nerfs on otherwise balanced cards, bring deckbuilding to an all-time low and get rotated one year earlier for being such a threat to the game's health.
- Genn and Baku's historical entry on the White Book of Shit Design, shortly before retiring unpunished
The problem isn't content droughts. It's stale content, namely the entire evergreen set. The data out there suggest that at any given time throughout the year, the meta is more than 40% classic and basic cards. How can your refresh period not touch almost half the meta and expect to actually refresh anything? We have several old expansions to pull cards from now and the possibility to create a yearly rotating core set. Magic has proven that it works. Not only would it allow stale cards to leave and bring new life into the game but rotating old cards back in allows for Blizzard to update the art. That is what this game needs so bad.
The other thing I want to state is this. Hearthstone's card design quality is absolutely abysmal. The amount of cards that are simply nonviable at every point in their life span in standard is much higher than the amount of cards that actually find a home in tier 4 or above decks. Hearthstone feels creatively bankrupt.
As I see the new cards revealed, everyone is rushing to comment on whether these cards are good or bad, but I think that discussion is meaningless. The discussion we should be having is whether these cards are fun or not. How do these new cards offer new ways to play? In my opinion, that is what matters in a time where good and bad cards already exist but fun is the problem. So I ask you, where is the fun in the new cards? The last honest to god fun card was Academic Espionage and Blizzard ensured that it wasn't good enough to be competitive. If Hearthstone is to succeed it needs to put fun first. Right now, Team 5 is not doing that and that is why Hearthstone is stale.
This. People rush to say “how does this fit into my copy-paste netdeck”? instead of “how can this card bring new archetypes and refreshed joy to the game?
I really don’t understand why people still think HS is a competitive game. It’s really a meme game and meme decks are the best way to bring out the excitement. And that’s ok. I love HS for the memes, but I don’t t kid myself by thinking it’s competitove or that rank makes any difference. I play MTG for a skill-based challenge. HS is more meme-based and that’s it’s too charm.
Not going into the effects of the idea itself (hint, very little change week to week and much more staleness), this would murder the economic model for Blizzard. How do you make packs for this? Are you assured the newer cards or do I have to open packs of stuff I already have to hope and get the recently added cards?
They would need to smash the current pack/dust system to attempt this.
It's not a matter of quantity but a matter of quality. Here is the thing: the game is meant to be played casually, the more you play the faster will figure it out and the sooner you will reach the stale phase. This is the direction they took years ago and it won't change as it is the most profitable.
You do not believe me? Just see all existing decks in the current meta which is one of good metas we had. There are 3 to 4 decks with multiple reskins as was the previous meta and the meta before it.As long as the cards have 0 actual complexity or depth and we do not get to interact during opponent's turn the game will always feel stale.
You see most people confuse of having different decks with having different experience. There can be 100 different viable decks that play the same and there can be 10 different decks that make every game play out differently. But as i said this will make the game more complex so it won't happen.
Reno Jackson, Genn, Baku, Gul'Dan, Tunnel Trogg, Kingsbane, Juicy Psychmelon all say hi.
The quantity of the cards is mostly irrelevant. Make a single card with strong synergy with existing cards and bam you broke the meta.
Haven't even thought about that lol :p
So you are suggesting monthly power creep. Bad idea. Incredibly bad.
One single card could ruin entire game.
Ask the community and yourself, do you WANT a weekly card that's so powerful it warps the meta like Genn/baku/Reno/ext does? You want to see what happens to all of the rest of the cards when you regularly introduce meta breaking cards? Saw how overused Giggling was? That's the problem with power creep. And that's what will happen with each weekly card: it'll not just change the meta, but the meta will revolve around it. Every deck that can use the card will use it and every deck that can't will be less used.
This is less of an issue with an expansion since you can add multiple high impact cards so that multiple classes and decks can develop. Them, along with counter decks and older decks that gain a resurgence, will create a new meta.
ONE card, though, will either be weak enough to not matter or strong enough to be yet another overused giggling. What's worse, it WON'T be able to make a new deck since it won't come with other cards to create synergy. That means the card MUST be usable with old decks (thus it'll be old deck + new thing) to see play. Again, see how giggling didn't make new decks, just empowered old ones.
Then you get to class issues. Were you guys around during the Adventures? Is there anyone who remember Naxx when Warlocks and Hunters exploded for 2 weeks since key cards were given early on, mages were in the crapper until they blew up a few weeks later, and Paladins had to wait 4 week for a card that would be deemed a dumpster fire for the next year?
Shaman getting crappy ice powers in Frozen throne gets mitigated when they get a pretty cool Death Knight in the same expansion. Rogue was given overall crap except for Blink Fox, which didn't REALLY help, but that was fine since Baku and a few key neutrals were all they needed. Priest was given Purify and had nothing else to play with since it was in an Adventure and there were few cards to work with so there was no room for meme play-play cards.
We moved away from Adventures for a darn good reason. If you don't remember them or you're under rose colored glasses nostalgia about them, just trust me, they are best long gone. Solutions to HS' problems will need to come elsewhere.
One does not simply walk into Mordor,
unless they want to be the best they can be.
Maybe once a month at the start of every new season
Having the meta change every week is a terrible idea. Imagine the difficulties Blizzard would have in ensuring that the meta stays balanced from week to week, and the problems players would have in making crafting decisions. You will have lots of players complaining that they can't decide whether to invest in a particular deck, because who knows how the meta will change next week with the addition of new cards?
I do agree, however, that 3 expansions a year is too few and results in long stretches of stale meta. I think there should be 3 big expansions a year and 2 smaller sets (of around 20-35 cards each) released between each expansion. That way there will be fresh cards every 2-2.5 months instead of every 4 months.
This is one of the dumbest idea i've ever heard.
I didn't suggest jack. All I did was point out that your refutal was invalid and explain why. I agreed with Trollbert as soon as I read his post, which also disagrees with the OP.
Still, bad or niche cards being added can do a lot. I remember Marin the Fox shaking up the meta a bit, and he did not powercreep anything.
There's no need to assume Blizzard can only either add Worgen Greasers or Jade Idols to the game. There are middle grounds in terms of power and interesting mechanics.
Start of Year: Provoke the failure of 3 expansions, force nerfs on otherwise balanced cards, bring deckbuilding to an all-time low and get rotated one year earlier for being such a threat to the game's health.
- Genn and Baku's historical entry on the White Book of Shit Design, shortly before retiring unpunished
Would smaller patches more often be a way forward? I think the WoW dev team aimed for smaller and more frequent patches after Warlords.
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)
The problem isn't with how often we get content, it's how often the top decks in the meta change. Right now we get about 6 changes a year (3 expansions and 3 balance changes), but how often do we see changes at the top of the meta? It's a fine line to balance an expansion so that it impacts the meta enough to get rid of the staleness without making old deck unplayable, and Blizzard has been pretty hit-or-miss with that. The change needed isn't more card releases, it is more consistent quality of card releases.
Update: They just added 4 new cards in classic mode so I can now say I predicted this
What? xD
Start of Year: Provoke the failure of 3 expansions, force nerfs on otherwise balanced cards, bring deckbuilding to an all-time low and get rotated one year earlier for being such a threat to the game's health.
- Genn and Baku's historical entry on the White Book of Shit Design, shortly before retiring unpunished