If you're playing a combo deck, then I guess it seems like odd paladin is boring (for both you and the opponent). If you play something like even shaman, then the odd paladin matchup is more fun for both players. I personally like mid range but since I've already played even paladin throughout the last season and even shaman throughout the season before, and there are few other viable midrange decks (aside from warlock which doesn't appeal to me), I'm trying maly druid to get more into combo. Once you pull off the combo a few times, it also can be dull. Guess it's all subjective.
I would say that exciting back and forth matches that involve some risky decisions from both players until one ultimately pays off. Unfortunately I feel like this is also the reason its become the shittossing RNG clusterfuck of a game we recognize as hearthstone today
Basicly because they are easy to play and very consitenst and error forgiving.
Thats why most of the time you wont have a good game in HS, because you either play a facerolling frontpage netdeck, which is boring or you play some sort of a challenging-fun-combo deck and you lose against the boring decks.
When you understand winning as a good gameplay then you will have good games even with the boring decks.
Today i played 5 games, 3 odd Paladin and 2 spell hunter...
From the scratch you know what deck you are facing and 90% of the time you can already say if you have even a chance to win depending on what deck you have. So you might as well concede...
Good gameplay aside, since odd Paladin was mentioned a lot as boring and hard to beat deck...i mostly win with dragon warrior and dragon priest against odd paladins. If you get the board clears from the start they totally run out of steam and mostly concede at turn 6-7.
Back to good gameplay...dragon priest isnt exactly the most fun deck to play, it feels more variable then before but still...
I think good gameplay is when all tier 1 and 2 decks have a good chance of beating any other tier 1 and 2 deck and the difference between tiers is low. By that I mean you can play a very off meta deck and still win maybe 40-45% of games.
I also think unique effects make for good gameplay. One of the best parts of hearthstone is trying out genuinely new cards. That's why the playable hero and quests were so fun. I have been a little disappointed recently because a lot of the new cards seem to have similar effects to ones already in the game. I think zuljin is an example of a card that could have been so much more. I know it feels new to some people, but, for me, it's disappointing to have a hero that only casts cards I can already play.
In sum: Good gameplay is when cards are more than just bunches of stats, every game is worth playing out till the end, and there are many viable decks
For me good gameplay would be matches where players face off each other, and it's never too sure who will have the upper hand. Matches where both players seem to have nearly the same chance at winning, where both players interact with each other and answer each other's plays.
Pretty much this. It SUCKS queing up with a certain deck knowing you don't really have a chance against some other decks which are popular.
Old control warrior vs freeze mage was bad enough, but now it's half of the game at least.
Also, when everything is OP, nothing is OP, BUT it just banishes all the homebrews to the dumpster t4. It's been 1 week or RR and it barely got any better than the Boomsday meta, so, April rotation I guess...
For card games to have 'good' gameplay, I would have to argue that it involves interaction and counter play.
I don't really like OTK or combo decks, but as long as there are 'answers' or counter play, I am ok with those types of decks existing.
The real issue is that Hearthstone is a best of one game. That means you are forced to main deck your tech cards or simply concede that the OTK and combo decks will always beat you.
You need a way to change cards out based on your match ups, or perhaps have a best of 3 format and change between games.
A suggestion I have seen before and that I like is to first implement the following idea into the Tavern Brawl and see how it fares:
During deck creation, you have a tab that allows you to swap cards out. Probably a maximum of 5. Then when you facing an opponent but before mulligan or cards are shown, you choose what type of 'load out' you want to have. You see that your opponent is paladin, so you have to guess either aggro and Odd, or OTK and the Holy Wrath combo. Then whatever loadout you created ahead of time is loaded into your deck.
For example, weapon destruction cards are useless against some classes, like Priest. So when facing a priest, you can choose a load out that takes out your weapon cards and puts in something else.
I see this type of option to be good gameplay. Right now, without a way to have a best of 3, you simply lose against certain match ups no matter what your starting hand is.
Having multiple possible lines, none of which are objectively and obviously the best. Sometimes Hearthstone does a good job at providing this. Other times it's not about your decisions.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Life before death. Strength before weakness. Journey before destination.
Good gameplay is pretty much every archetype and playstyle having a time to shine, we got Facestone from 2014-2015. Curvestone from 2015 to mid 2017, Controlstone from mid 2017 to march 2018(yez razakus and cubelock together were pretty much controlstone) and Combostone from april 2018 to now, everything has been viable and has had their time under the sun.
this post i retrieved from reddit back from the curvestone lol no AoE era actually sums it up
"I think the main problem is that we had the minion centric curvestone party for far to long now.
I remember back in magic it was the opposite. Most people grew sick of cheap ass spells and shitty creatures, when they changed it to a more minion centric focus most people where pumped.
You can have the most balanced and versatile meta you can imagine, if you have it for to long it gets stale and boring. You will get sick of it eventually, no matter how cool the top decks are.
After month of Secret pally, Zoolock and Midrange Hunter pre WotoG I was hoping they would try something different than curvestone. I just wish they would move the game into another direction for like one standard year. When we all grow sick of a spell heavy game they can switch it back to curvestone, but for now i just can't see it anymore."
Good gameplay is pretty much every archetype and playstyle having a time to shine, we got Facestone from 2014-2015. Curvestone from 2015 to mid 2017, Controlstone from mid 2017 to march 2018(yez razakus and cubelock together were pretty much controlstone) and Combostone from april 2018 to now, everything has been viable and has had their time under the sun.
this post i retrieved from reddit back from the curvestone lol no AoE era actually sums it up
"I think the main problem is that we had the minion centric curvestone party for far to long now.
I remember back in magic it was the opposite. Most people grew sick of cheap ass spells and shitty creatures, when they changed it to a more minion centric focus most people where pumped.
You can have the most balanced and versatile meta you can imagine, if you have it for to long it gets stale and boring. You will get sick of it eventually, no matter how cool the top decks are.
After month of Secret pally, Zoolock and Midrange Hunter pre WotoG I was hoping they would try something different than curvestone. I just wish they would move the game into another direction for like one standard year. When we all grow sick of a spell heavy game they can switch it back to curvestone, but for now i just can't see it anymore."
I agree that changing around the metagame is what makes things play 'better', but that is not up to the devs. They create the cards, but don't always know or can even predict what's going to happen. They have a general idea that a card is 'good', but sometimes the players and deck creators surprise you. Sometimes they just dont test all the card interactions either.
The only real way the devs can change the metagame is if they release new cards or change how standard works. What I would like to see is some sort of rotating sets for standard. Others made similar suggestions, but to offer your definition of good gameplay, then we need to keeps cards fresh in the card pool.
These are ways to do this without releasing new sets all the time:
1. Put up for voting and have the community vote on the 5 legal sets for the next 3 months. You could even limit the voting pool to specific sets in order to encourage the metagame change. You could make this once per year, maybe at the end of the rotation. Or a special event to see how 1 month on the ladder fares doing this change. The idea is to give players the choice and let the players change the metagame. How does Blizzard win in this exchange? They can offer the older sets for sale again or perhaps make it so older cards have cheaper dust costs to craft for a limited time.
2. We have 'combostone' right now and I would agree. Many classes and decks have a single win condition that either requires an OTK element or an unbeatable combo that can't be prevented. Decks also have infinite value cards now and games go on much longer than before. The ability to have more interaction or counter play would alleviate some of the frustration around this. But without it, the combo decks will simply become more numerous as more cards are released.
3. Variety of game modes also offer 'better' gameplay. We don't have enough choices right now and I would like to see that. You could have community voted special event modes. The community votes on the next special 'ladder' mode. For example, you could have the players to vote for game changing effects that last all game and affect this mode only. An example would be 'All spells cost 1 less to play.' or 'All death rattle minions cost 1 less to play.'
Good gameplay is pretty much every archetype and playstyle having a time to shine, we got Facestone from 2014-2015. Curvestone from 2015 to mid 2017, Controlstone from mid 2017 to march 2018(yez razakus and cubelock together were pretty much controlstone) and Combostone from april 2018 to now, everything has been viable and has had their time under the sun.
this post i retrieved from reddit back from the curvestone lol no AoE era actually sums it up
"I think the main problem is that we had the minion centric curvestone party for far to long now.
I remember back in magic it was the opposite. Most people grew sick of cheap ass spells and shitty creatures, when they changed it to a more minion centric focus most people where pumped.
You can have the most balanced and versatile meta you can imagine, if you have it for to long it gets stale and boring. You will get sick of it eventually, no matter how cool the top decks are.
After month of Secret pally, Zoolock and Midrange Hunter pre WotoG I was hoping they would try something different than curvestone. I just wish they would move the game into another direction for like one standard year. When we all grow sick of a spell heavy game they can switch it back to curvestone, but for now i just can't see it anymore."
I agree that changing around the metagame is what makes things play 'better', but that is not up to the devs. They create the cards, but don't always know or can even predict what's going to happen. They have a general idea that a card is 'good', but sometimes the players and deck creators surprise you. Sometimes they just dont test all the card interactions either.
The only real way the devs can change the metagame is if they release new cards or change how standard works. What I would like to see is some sort of rotating sets for standard. Others made similar suggestions, but to offer your definition of good gameplay, then we need to keeps cards fresh in the card pool.
These are ways to do this without releasing new sets all the time:
1. Put up for voting and have the community vote on the 5 legal sets for the next 3 months. You could even limit the voting pool to specific sets in order to encourage the metagame change. You could make this once per year, maybe at the end of the rotation. Or a special event to see how 1 month on the ladder fares doing this change. The idea is to give players the choice and let the players change the metagame. How does Blizzard win in this exchange? They can offer the older sets for sale again or perhaps make it so older cards have cheaper dust costs to craft for a limited time.
2. We have 'combostone' right now and I would agree. Many classes and decks have a single win condition that either requires an OTK element or an unbeatable combo that can't be prevented. Decks also have infinite value cards now and games go on much longer than before. The ability to have more interaction or counter play would alleviate some of the frustration around this. But without it, the combo decks will simply become more numerous as more cards are released.
3. Variety of game modes also offer 'better' gameplay. We don't have enough choices right now and I would like to see that. You could have community voted special event modes. The community votes on the next special 'ladder' mode. For example, you could have the players to vote for game changing effects that last all game and affect this mode only. An example would be 'All spells cost 1 less to play.' or 'All death rattle minions cost 1 less to play.'
Good gameplay is pretty much every archetype and playstyle having a time to shine, we got Facestone from 2014-2015. Curvestone from 2015 to mid 2017, Controlstone from mid 2017 to march 2018(yez razakus and cubelock together were pretty much controlstone) and Combostone from april 2018 to now, everything has been viable and has had their time under the sun.
this post i retrieved from reddit back from the curvestone lol no AoE era actually sums it up
"I think the main problem is that we had the minion centric curvestone party for far to long now.
I remember back in magic it was the opposite. Most people grew sick of cheap ass spells and shitty creatures, when they changed it to a more minion centric focus most people where pumped.
You can have the most balanced and versatile meta you can imagine, if you have it for to long it gets stale and boring. You will get sick of it eventually, no matter how cool the top decks are.
After month of Secret pally, Zoolock and Midrange Hunter pre WotoG I was hoping they would try something different than curvestone. I just wish they would move the game into another direction for like one standard year. When we all grow sick of a spell heavy game they can switch it back to curvestone, but for now i just can't see it anymore."
I agree that changing around the metagame is what makes things play 'better', but that is not up to the devs. They create the cards, but don't always know or can even predict what's going to happen. They have a general idea that a card is 'good', but sometimes the players and deck creators surprise you. Sometimes they just dont test all the card interactions either.
The only real way the devs can change the metagame is if they release new cards or change how standard works. What I would like to see is some sort of rotating sets for standard. Others made similar suggestions, but to offer your definition of good gameplay, then we need to keeps cards fresh in the card pool.
These are ways to do this without releasing new sets all the time:
1. Put up for voting and have the community vote on the 5 legal sets for the next 3 months. You could even limit the voting pool to specific sets in order to encourage the metagame change. You could make this once per year, maybe at the end of the rotation. Or a special event to see how 1 month on the ladder fares doing this change. The idea is to give players the choice and let the players change the metagame. How does Blizzard win in this exchange? They can offer the older sets for sale again or perhaps make it so older cards have cheaper dust costs to craft for a limited time.
2. We have 'combostone' right now and I would agree. Many classes and decks have a single win condition that either requires an OTK element or an unbeatable combo that can't be prevented. Decks also have infinite value cards now and games go on much longer than before. The ability to have more interaction or counter play would alleviate some of the frustration around this. But without it, the combo decks will simply become more numerous as more cards are released.
3. Variety of game modes also offer 'better' gameplay. We don't have enough choices right now and I would like to see that. You could have community voted special event modes. The community votes on the next special 'ladder' mode. For example, you could have the players to vote for game changing effects that last all game and affect this mode only. An example would be 'All spells cost 1 less to play.' or 'All death rattle minions cost 1 less to play.'
Good gameplay is pretty much every archetype and playstyle having a time to shine, we got Facestone from 2014-2015. Curvestone from 2015 to mid 2017, Controlstone from mid 2017 to march 2018(yez razakus and cubelock together were pretty much controlstone) and Combostone from april 2018 to now, everything has been viable and has had their time under the sun.
this post i retrieved from reddit back from the curvestone lol no AoE era actually sums it up
"I think the main problem is that we had the minion centric curvestone party for far to long now.
I remember back in magic it was the opposite. Most people grew sick of cheap ass spells and shitty creatures, when they changed it to a more minion centric focus most people where pumped.
You can have the most balanced and versatile meta you can imagine, if you have it for to long it gets stale and boring. You will get sick of it eventually, no matter how cool the top decks are.
After month of Secret pally, Zoolock and Midrange Hunter pre WotoG I was hoping they would try something different than curvestone. I just wish they would move the game into another direction for like one standard year. When we all grow sick of a spell heavy game they can switch it back to curvestone, but for now i just can't see it anymore."
I agree that changing around the metagame is what makes things play 'better', but that is not up to the devs. They create the cards, but don't always know or can even predict what's going to happen. They have a general idea that a card is 'good', but sometimes the players and deck creators surprise you. Sometimes they just dont test all the card interactions either.
The only real way the devs can change the metagame is if they release new cards or change how standard works. What I would like to see is some sort of rotating sets for standard. Others made similar suggestions, but to offer your definition of good gameplay, then we need to keeps cards fresh in the card pool.
These are ways to do this without releasing new sets all the time:
1. Put up for voting and have the community vote on the 5 legal sets for the next 3 months. You could even limit the voting pool to specific sets in order to encourage the metagame change. You could make this once per year, maybe at the end of the rotation. Or a special event to see how 1 month on the ladder fares doing this change. The idea is to give players the choice and let the players change the metagame. How does Blizzard win in this exchange? They can offer the older sets for sale again or perhaps make it so older cards have cheaper dust costs to craft for a limited time.
2. We have 'combostone' right now and I would agree. Many classes and decks have a single win condition that either requires an OTK element or an unbeatable combo that can't be prevented. Decks also have infinite value cards now and games go on much longer than before. The ability to have more interaction or counter play would alleviate some of the frustration around this. But without it, the combo decks will simply become more numerous as more cards are released.
3. Variety of game modes also offer 'better' gameplay. We don't have enough choices right now and I would like to see that. You could have community voted special event modes. The community votes on the next special 'ladder' mode. For example, you could have the players to vote for game changing effects that last all game and affect this mode only. An example would be 'All spells cost 1 less to play.' or 'All death rattle minions cost 1 less to play.'
ohh, i actually like Combostone and would like to see at least another 6 months of it tbh, we had curvestone for 3 years, and i really like metas where minion's effects matter more than their stats, so why not having the combos be viable a little longer?
Good gameplay is when both players get to play the game and stand a decent chance of winning based on their decisions instead of Just what they happen to go up against (e.g. otk decks rely on you,player, to not mess up without really depending on what your opponent does,or face decks that Just play SMORC and Hope the opponent doesn't draw the answers),good gameplay Is in fun (and powerful sometimes) interactions between cards that do impact the game in a strong way but at the same time give the opponent counterplay that isn't just limited to: KILL THEM
(There's a big IMO at the start,i Just wrote It here so that All those Who try and cling onto the smallest detail Just ti disagree with others can almost taste their inevitabile:"fun Is subjective" before I crush It toghether with their hopes and Dreams😊)
Good gameplay is when both players get to play the game and stand a decent chance of winning based on their decisions instead of Just what they happen to go up against (e.g. otk decks rely on you,player, to not mess up without really depending on what your opponent does,or face decks that Just play SMORC and Hope the opponent doesn't draw the answers),good gameplay Is in fun (and powerful sometimes) interactions between cards that do impact the game in a strong way but at the same time give the opponent counterplay that isn't just limited to: KILL THEM
(There's a big IMO at the start,i Just wrote It here so that All those Who try and cling onto the smallest detail Just ti disagree with others can almost taste their inevitabile:"fun Is subjective" before I crush It toghether with their hopes and Dreams😊)
Just noticed there are a few mistakes here and there,and (as cliche as It May sound) Sorry autocorrect (you know,since i'm not english,my phone doesn't speak english)
Good gameplay is related to influence imo. When I have high influence with skill and good decisions. However it seems atm hearthstone is just Rock/Paper/Scissors with 100% ratios of some matchups.
Some cards just dont have any counterplay, like Rexxar,Kingsbane or just kill you otk. like Topsy or Zookadin.
That deems control/midrange decks basically unplayable which pushes a lot of people into aggro that dont even neccessary want to play aggro.
Odd Rogue/pala are not the problem theire just a symptom of bad card designe mainly in the WOTLK set.
Boomsday/Ratakhan were balanced pretty well IMO but that makes them lakluster compared to the presets. Rotation next year has a good chance of making matchups less biased.
Also Team 5 could rework the basic set which is way overdue IMO. including some more hate cards to push interaction into healthy territory again.
To put it simply: Good gameplay is interactivity with your opponent and their strategy. Having less of this interaction with the opponent results in bad gameplay.
I think to a point there is a larger discussion to have about what Hearthstone is. The game is generally speaking a bit of Rock/Paper/Scissors, and a bit of Yahtzee. Match ups make up the Rock/Paper/Scissor part. Every deck has good and bad match ups, and to a point you can shift your deck around to help, but generally speaking even then you are either favored or not going into a match up. The next portion is the RNG. This is where the Yahtzee side comes in. You take turns back and forth rolling dice. You can make strategic decisions based on how you roll, maybe you'll use those three 5's you just rolled for you 5's total, maybe its better as your 3 of a kind total. This is where you get a chance to play your cards and try to play them optimally. However, sometimes the dice just don't roll in your favor and you lose. Either way, the biggest down side to HS at the moment is how frustrating most of the losses feel. Combo decks are everywhere, even if they are weaker than the Aggro decks, simply because people like playing them more. However, the majority of Combo mirrors or Combo vs Control match ups are all about how quickly/efficiently the winner gets to their combo. All the cards in between don't really matter and so most of what you spend the game doing doesn't matter that much. Yes it matters somewhat, but most of the current decks don't really give their opponent much counter play, and they generally win the game nearly on the spot. This means that you do generally get to feel pretty good when you win, but you almost never get to feel good when you lose. This leads to winrate pretty much defining everyone's "fun". Its true that you can see some streamers and players playing wacky decks that they are clearly just playing for fun, but generally because HS doesn't have a massive amount of interaction beyond what is in play, and only on your turn 99% of the time.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To crush your enemies, to see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentations of the women.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Why u hav to be mad? is only card gaem.
If you're playing a combo deck, then I guess it seems like odd paladin is boring (for both you and the opponent). If you play something like even shaman, then the odd paladin matchup is more fun for both players. I personally like mid range but since I've already played even paladin throughout the last season and even shaman throughout the season before, and there are few other viable midrange decks (aside from warlock which doesn't appeal to me), I'm trying maly druid to get more into combo. Once you pull off the combo a few times, it also can be dull. Guess it's all subjective.
I would say that exciting back and forth matches that involve some risky decisions from both players until one ultimately pays off. Unfortunately I feel like this is also the reason its become the shittossing RNG clusterfuck of a game we recognize as hearthstone today
Pretty much all of the good decks are boring...
Basicly because they are easy to play and very consitenst and error forgiving.
Thats why most of the time you wont have a good game in HS, because you either play a facerolling frontpage netdeck, which is boring or you play some sort of a challenging-fun-combo deck and you lose against the boring decks.
When you understand winning as a good gameplay then you will have good games even with the boring decks.
Today i played 5 games, 3 odd Paladin and 2 spell hunter...
From the scratch you know what deck you are facing and 90% of the time you can already say if you have even a chance to win depending on what deck you have. So you might as well concede...
Good gameplay aside, since odd Paladin was mentioned a lot as boring and hard to beat deck...i mostly win with dragon warrior and dragon priest against odd paladins. If you get the board clears from the start they totally run out of steam and mostly concede at turn 6-7.
Back to good gameplay...dragon priest isnt exactly the most fun deck to play, it feels more variable then before but still...
Dragon Warrior? It feels week...
I think good gameplay is when all tier 1 and 2 decks have a good chance of beating any other tier 1 and 2 deck and the difference between tiers is low. By that I mean you can play a very off meta deck and still win maybe 40-45% of games.
I also think unique effects make for good gameplay. One of the best parts of hearthstone is trying out genuinely new cards. That's why the playable hero and quests were so fun. I have been a little disappointed recently because a lot of the new cards seem to have similar effects to ones already in the game. I think zuljin is an example of a card that could have been so much more. I know it feels new to some people, but, for me, it's disappointing to have a hero that only casts cards I can already play.
In sum: Good gameplay is when cards are more than just bunches of stats, every game is worth playing out till the end, and there are many viable decks
Pretty much this. It SUCKS queing up with a certain deck knowing you don't really have a chance against some other decks which are popular.
Old control warrior vs freeze mage was bad enough, but now it's half of the game at least.
Also, when everything is OP, nothing is OP, BUT it just banishes all the homebrews to the dumpster t4. It's been 1 week or RR and it barely got any better than the Boomsday meta, so, April rotation I guess...
Paper is fine, nerf Rock. Sincerely, Scissors.
For card games to have 'good' gameplay, I would have to argue that it involves interaction and counter play.
I don't really like OTK or combo decks, but as long as there are 'answers' or counter play, I am ok with those types of decks existing.
The real issue is that Hearthstone is a best of one game. That means you are forced to main deck your tech cards or simply concede that the OTK and combo decks will always beat you.
You need a way to change cards out based on your match ups, or perhaps have a best of 3 format and change between games.
A suggestion I have seen before and that I like is to first implement the following idea into the Tavern Brawl and see how it fares:
During deck creation, you have a tab that allows you to swap cards out. Probably a maximum of 5. Then when you facing an opponent but before mulligan or cards are shown, you choose what type of 'load out' you want to have. You see that your opponent is paladin, so you have to guess either aggro and Odd, or OTK and the Holy Wrath combo. Then whatever loadout you created ahead of time is loaded into your deck.
For example, weapon destruction cards are useless against some classes, like Priest. So when facing a priest, you can choose a load out that takes out your weapon cards and puts in something else.
I see this type of option to be good gameplay. Right now, without a way to have a best of 3, you simply lose against certain match ups no matter what your starting hand is.
Having multiple possible lines, none of which are objectively and obviously the best. Sometimes Hearthstone does a good job at providing this. Other times it's not about your decisions.
Kaladin's RoS Set Review
Join me at Out of Cards!
Good gameplay is pretty much every archetype and playstyle having a time to shine, we got Facestone from 2014-2015. Curvestone from 2015 to mid 2017, Controlstone from mid 2017 to march 2018(yez razakus and cubelock together were pretty much controlstone) and Combostone from april 2018 to now, everything has been viable and has had their time under the sun.
this post i retrieved from reddit back from the curvestone lol no AoE era actually sums it up
"I think the main problem is that we had the minion centric curvestone party for far to long now.
I remember back in magic it was the opposite. Most people grew sick of cheap ass spells and shitty creatures, when they changed it to a more minion centric focus most people where pumped.
You can have the most balanced and versatile meta you can imagine, if you have it for to long it gets stale and boring. You will get sick of it eventually, no matter how cool the top decks are.
After month of Secret pally, Zoolock and Midrange Hunter pre WotoG I was hoping they would try something different than curvestone. I just wish they would move the game into another direction for like one standard year. When we all grow sick of a spell heavy game they can switch it back to curvestone, but for now i just can't see it anymore."
Come backs is good gameplay... Also when I am not the one who turns a loosing situation into a win.
I agree that changing around the metagame is what makes things play 'better', but that is not up to the devs. They create the cards, but don't always know or can even predict what's going to happen. They have a general idea that a card is 'good', but sometimes the players and deck creators surprise you. Sometimes they just dont test all the card interactions either.
The only real way the devs can change the metagame is if they release new cards or change how standard works. What I would like to see is some sort of rotating sets for standard. Others made similar suggestions, but to offer your definition of good gameplay, then we need to keeps cards fresh in the card pool.
These are ways to do this without releasing new sets all the time:
1. Put up for voting and have the community vote on the 5 legal sets for the next 3 months. You could even limit the voting pool to specific sets in order to encourage the metagame change. You could make this once per year, maybe at the end of the rotation. Or a special event to see how 1 month on the ladder fares doing this change. The idea is to give players the choice and let the players change the metagame. How does Blizzard win in this exchange? They can offer the older sets for sale again or perhaps make it so older cards have cheaper dust costs to craft for a limited time.
2. We have 'combostone' right now and I would agree. Many classes and decks have a single win condition that either requires an OTK element or an unbeatable combo that can't be prevented. Decks also have infinite value cards now and games go on much longer than before. The ability to have more interaction or counter play would alleviate some of the frustration around this. But without it, the combo decks will simply become more numerous as more cards are released.
3. Variety of game modes also offer 'better' gameplay. We don't have enough choices right now and I would like to see that. You could have community voted special event modes. The community votes on the next special 'ladder' mode. For example, you could have the players to vote for game changing effects that last all game and affect this mode only. An example would be 'All spells cost 1 less to play.' or 'All death rattle minions cost 1 less to play.'
ohh, i actually like Combostone and would like to see at least another 6 months of it tbh, we had curvestone for 3 years, and i really like metas where minion's effects matter more than their stats, so why not having the combos be viable a little longer?
*plays Hearthstone*
Rage quitting: the best way to ensure your opponent knows they beat a giant baby.
Good gameplay is when both players get to play the game and stand a decent chance of winning based on their decisions instead of Just what they happen to go up against (e.g. otk decks rely on you,player, to not mess up without really depending on what your opponent does,or face decks that Just play SMORC and Hope the opponent doesn't draw the answers),good gameplay Is in fun (and powerful sometimes) interactions between cards that do impact the game in a strong way but at the same time give the opponent counterplay that isn't just limited to: KILL THEM
(There's a big IMO at the start,i Just wrote It here so that All those Who try and cling onto the smallest detail Just ti disagree with others can almost taste their inevitabile:"fun Is subjective" before I crush It toghether with their hopes and Dreams😊)
Just noticed there are a few mistakes here and there,and (as cliche as It May sound) Sorry autocorrect (you know,since i'm not english,my phone doesn't speak english)
There is no such thing as good gameplay (in general)
Any gameplay is only good or bad depending on the perspective of the persons playing it.
It can even be good and bad at the same time for 2 people playing the same game, because they might just see it different ways.
If you don't think that Hearthstone has good gameplay then it does not (from your perspective) and there a milion other games you can try.
Good gameplay is related to influence imo. When I have high influence with skill and good decisions. However it seems atm hearthstone is just Rock/Paper/Scissors with 100% ratios of some matchups.
Some cards just dont have any counterplay, like Rexxar,Kingsbane or just kill you otk. like Topsy or Zookadin.
That deems control/midrange decks basically unplayable which pushes a lot of people into aggro that dont even neccessary want to play aggro.
Odd Rogue/pala are not the problem theire just a symptom of bad card designe mainly in the WOTLK set.
Boomsday/Ratakhan were balanced pretty well IMO but that makes them lakluster compared to the presets. Rotation next year has a good chance of making matchups less biased.
Also Team 5 could rework the basic set which is way overdue IMO. including some more hate cards to push interaction into healthy territory again.
Pretty sure the ‘to you’ was heavily implied.
To put it simply: Good gameplay is interactivity with your opponent and their strategy. Having less of this interaction with the opponent results in bad gameplay.
I think to a point there is a larger discussion to have about what Hearthstone is. The game is generally speaking a bit of Rock/Paper/Scissors, and a bit of Yahtzee. Match ups make up the Rock/Paper/Scissor part. Every deck has good and bad match ups, and to a point you can shift your deck around to help, but generally speaking even then you are either favored or not going into a match up. The next portion is the RNG. This is where the Yahtzee side comes in. You take turns back and forth rolling dice. You can make strategic decisions based on how you roll, maybe you'll use those three 5's you just rolled for you 5's total, maybe its better as your 3 of a kind total. This is where you get a chance to play your cards and try to play them optimally. However, sometimes the dice just don't roll in your favor and you lose. Either way, the biggest down side to HS at the moment is how frustrating most of the losses feel. Combo decks are everywhere, even if they are weaker than the Aggro decks, simply because people like playing them more. However, the majority of Combo mirrors or Combo vs Control match ups are all about how quickly/efficiently the winner gets to their combo. All the cards in between don't really matter and so most of what you spend the game doing doesn't matter that much. Yes it matters somewhat, but most of the current decks don't really give their opponent much counter play, and they generally win the game nearly on the spot. This means that you do generally get to feel pretty good when you win, but you almost never get to feel good when you lose. This leads to winrate pretty much defining everyone's "fun". Its true that you can see some streamers and players playing wacky decks that they are clearly just playing for fun, but generally because HS doesn't have a massive amount of interaction beyond what is in play, and only on your turn 99% of the time.
To crush your enemies, to see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentations of the women.