I think tuning it down to 8 cards per class and 28 neutrals (100 cards) would do wonders. Less space for dumb filler, and a better opportunity for f2p players to get what they want a bit faster. That being said, blizzard loves their money, so wouldn't count on it.]
I like the idea of the core set getting some adjustments. for example, the sad sad Silverback Patriarch could easily have 1 more health, or maybe even 2. Just some silly tiny nerfs give f2p players a slightly bigger edge against the big ole wallet dudes. It doesn't change the game that much and gives new players a bit more opportunity to contest against people with a better collection.
Who will play, for example, the horrible rogue spellstone if you can play with warlock and hunter spellstone?
100, 1.000, 10.000 cards don't matter if we have 10 or 20 broken ones, everyone will ignore the entire pool and use only the out of balance cards.
I mention hunter spellstone? DK hunter is the same, who will play with warrior if one single f....... broken card completely destroy the entire class without a chance?
Instead of removing classic cards, which people purchased based on the understanding they would never rotate, why not add some cards to the classic pack to compensate for the the issues you raised?
Blizzard used to do adventures which contained much less cards, yet they didn't feel like they made the meta stale. Besides, a lot of cards from expansions are obviously unplayable fillers. They should focus on quality over quantity. I think it would be a good idea if expansions only get bigger over the course of the year, like this for instance.
1st expansion of the Year: 45 cards. The rotation already creates an artificial shakeup of the meta, so not much is needed to make this one feel new, hence why it's smaller. Blizzard could focus on creating cards they know will be useful later in the year (e.g. good Dragon if they know they'll release a lot of Dragons), lightly nudging the meta in a direction or another.
2nd expansion: 90 cards. At this point they can start releasing "flashy" buildaround cards to create new archetypes, but they should remain careful about them not being too OP. They can also expand upon underplayed archetypes from last year.
3rd expansion: 135 cards. Here they can go completely nuts and intentionnaly print broken cards (eg Drakonid Operative), though those cards should only be "broken" in conjunction with cards that will rotate next expansion, otherwise this set might ruin the next year.
What do you think?
How did you come to the conclusion that replacing ~400 cards in standard with 45 new ones when the rotation hits is a good idea? Your goal is a chainging metagame, right?
Also, remember that even though a card is only a tiny bit better, people will still stop playing the worst one, no matter how big or small the cardpool is.
Unfortunately, if you want more variety in this game, you will also have to accept more polarized matchups. The only way a lot of decks can remain viable at once is by being super hard-counters to something else. With more even matchups, fewer decks will rise to the top.
I think tuning it down to 8 cards per class and 28 neutrals (100 cards) would do wonders. Less space for dumb filler, and a better opportunity for f2p players to get what they want a bit faster. That being said, blizzard loves their money, so wouldn't count on it.]
I like the idea of the core set getting some adjustments. for example, the sad sad Silverback Patriarch could easily have 1 more health, or maybe even 2. Just some silly tiny nerfs give f2p players a slightly bigger edge against the big ole wallet dudes. It doesn't change the game that much and gives new players a bit more opportunity to contest against people with a better collection.
blizzard loves their money so if they did reduce the number of cards dont think the ratio of useless filler cards would go down. If they print 50% useless cards they will print 50% useless cards no matter how many cards they introduce.
As a F2P player I would much rather have 100 good cards and 100 bad cards per expansion vs 50 good cards and 50 bad cards.
What we need is more cards, particularly more counter cards. The more cards we have and the more counter cards we have the more unique decks we will see.
Guys, I know that there will be a rotation in 4 months. My point is, we'll have the same issue every year if there's no change in how cards are released.
Blizzard used to do adventures which contained much less cards, yet they didn't feel like they made the meta stale.
I was there for every adventure. Where in the WORLD do people get this idea!?
Naxx was a broken mess of a power fest of an expansion and not a good example of 'quality' for a set.
BRM had half of its cards be utterly worthless (it pushed dragons but you couldn't make a dragon set until TGT, and even then dragon priest BARELY held on until the utterly broken as #()$)#( Mean Streets expansion.
BRM didn't go stale because of Grim Patron and Emperor. Are we proposing that we should have more sets that have cards like these more regularly?
LoE added in a 1/3 for 1 mana that grew for every overloaded crystal you did, a legendary that completely destroyed aggro, a card that gave every aggro deck the warlock or hunter hero power, and a LOT of worthless crap most people probably forgot.
Elise was fun but only could be used in fatigue warrior and turned those games into "who can find the I Win card first." Reno was loved ONLY because aggro was so horribly broken (partially due to LoE) that a card that completely destroyed it was acceptable. By the time the set rotated the pro community was long since happy to see it go in the same way people want to see Baku/Genn go.
One Night gave us a mage card that forced blizzard to completely revamp how they approach Arena just to manage, 1 mana Spirit Claws, and Purify. BARNES came from here.
And quality, too much trash in a set? expansions have less trash?!
People think of Purify in One Night but did you forget that Pantry Spider, Nightbane Templar, Menagerie Magician and all of those 'buff a murloc/beast/dragon' cards that didn't go anywhere came from here? Deadly Fork, Protect the King!, MOROES!, Arcanosmith, Ethereal Peddler @()$)(# I pride myself for remembering these cards and I forgot how many trash cards there were.
WHERE THE @*$)#*() do people get this "quality" business!
and by trash I don't mean 'memeworthy'. Prince Malchezaar isn't competitive but he was fun as anything and 'meme' or 'for fun' is a good reason for a card to exist. I tried to make those cards work for fun, and note I'm LOVING the spirits of this theme and have a pretty mean Spirit of the Dead priest deck I'm running right now. The above cards were trash for anyone. And I just grabbed the worst offenders: there's more.
A LOT of the Adventure cards were trash, and they got worse as they kept coming out. Many of our worst contenders for overpowered cards also came from those adventures which is why many remember these adventures having a 'high impact'. No one cares about the entire dragon theme being ignored when Grim Patron Warrior, and Emperor fueled mage and druid decks were all the rage. Overpowered cards do that. THat's why we were so happy with the death knights for the first month or so of Frozen Throne. Then realized we were stuck with them when rotation hit.
The adventures were a mix of some of the worst cards in the game and the most broken cards. The cards had to be standalone and powerful because trying to create a theme with 9 classes and 45 cards is IMPOSSIBLE. You CAN'T do anything interesting with only 2 cards in a class without making them high impact and high power level. So either you do put a card that's worthless until a full expansion can fix it (purify, avenge, voidcaller, Elise though she was fine since she relied on TGT and GvG) or you make something that completely warps the meta by himself (Mad Scientist, Emperor, Spirit Claws).
Larger expansions let you do things like what happened with spell hunter, where you can make a full set that's sort of good, then add more cards as you go on. Purify in Un'Goro would've been a fun meme that almost worked in tournaments as an addition to their deathrattle quest deck. Purify in an Adventure was a mockery that required an apology. Large expansions let you slip in cards like Hadronox, a card we laughed at during frozen throne bt didn't mind since Druid ALSO picked up UI, their DK, and other good cards.
put the point is, oh and
TL:DR summary
Adventures are FULL of utter trash cards. They are also full of utterly broken messes of cards which is why they were so 'high impact'. That's not quality, that's unbalanced.
The adventures got worse as they went on, making more trash and more broken mess to maintain a 'high impact'.
You can't make synergies well in adventures, thus the cards have to be standalone and broken or working with past decks. You also can't do 'sleepers' without REALLY pissing off the players.
Given our history, I don't get where the belief of "less cards mean better quality sets" means, unless they WANT more Undertakers and Tunnel Trog and believe that Firelands Portal was a good thing.
At BEST they are as bad as expansions, but with less to mess with over time. At worst they create exaggerate the problems. Experience has shown that they tend to be the latter and mostly only accepted in their day because they were either new or because their brokenness was better than what we already had thanks to some REALLY bad past sets.
So no, I don't see why we need LESS cards in our sets.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
One does not simply walk into Mordor,
unless they want to be the best they can be.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
is there somewhere that shows a list of the cards rotating out ? Looking forward to no more Inner Fires or Leeroy Jenkins
-DadamE
I think tuning it down to 8 cards per class and 28 neutrals (100 cards) would do wonders. Less space for dumb filler, and a better opportunity for f2p players to get what they want a bit faster. That being said, blizzard loves their money, so wouldn't count on it.]
I like the idea of the core set getting some adjustments. for example, the sad sad Silverback Patriarch could easily have 1 more health, or maybe even 2. Just some silly tiny nerfs give f2p players a slightly bigger edge against the big ole wallet dudes. It doesn't change the game that much and gives new players a bit more opportunity to contest against people with a better collection.
Why u hav to be mad? is only card gaem.
I don't think the size of the pool is an issue.
It is the cards balance the real problem.
Who will play, for example, the horrible rogue spellstone if you can play with warlock and hunter spellstone?
100, 1.000, 10.000 cards don't matter if we have 10 or 20 broken ones, everyone will ignore the entire pool and use only the out of balance cards.
I mention hunter spellstone? DK hunter is the same, who will play with warrior if one single f....... broken card completely destroy the entire class without a chance?
Instead of removing classic cards, which people purchased based on the understanding they would never rotate, why not add some cards to the classic pack to compensate for the the issues you raised?
How did you come to the conclusion that replacing ~400 cards in standard with 45 new ones when the rotation hits is a good idea? Your goal is a chainging metagame, right?
Also, remember that even though a card is only a tiny bit better, people will still stop playing the worst one, no matter how big or small the cardpool is.
Unfortunately, if you want more variety in this game, you will also have to accept more polarized matchups. The only way a lot of decks can remain viable at once is by being super hard-counters to something else. With more even matchups, fewer decks will rise to the top.
Editor of the Heartpwn Legendary Crafting Guide:
https://www.hearthpwn.com/forums/hearthstone-general/card-discussion/205920-legendary-tier-list-crafting-guide
blizzard loves their money so if they did reduce the number of cards dont think the ratio of useless filler cards would go down. If they print 50% useless cards they will print 50% useless cards no matter how many cards they introduce.
As a F2P player I would much rather have 100 good cards and 100 bad cards per expansion vs 50 good cards and 50 bad cards.
What we need is more cards, particularly more counter cards. The more cards we have and the more counter cards we have the more unique decks we will see.
Guys, I know that there will be a rotation in 4 months. My point is, we'll have the same issue every year if there's no change in how cards are released.
Custom cards :
CLASSES : Alchemist (CCC#5 | Phase V) | Chef (CCC#4)
EXPANSIONS : Year of the Scorpion (Year Comp)
135 cards per expansion, 3 expansions leaving, 1 entering. 3x-x=2x, 2x=270
*cluck*
I was there for every adventure. Where in the WORLD do people get this idea!?
Naxx was a broken mess of a power fest of an expansion and not a good example of 'quality' for a set.
BRM had half of its cards be utterly worthless (it pushed dragons but you couldn't make a dragon set until TGT, and even then dragon priest BARELY held on until the utterly broken as #()$)#( Mean Streets expansion.
BRM didn't go stale because of Grim Patron and Emperor. Are we proposing that we should have more sets that have cards like these more regularly?
LoE added in a 1/3 for 1 mana that grew for every overloaded crystal you did, a legendary that completely destroyed aggro, a card that gave every aggro deck the warlock or hunter hero power, and a LOT of worthless crap most people probably forgot.
Elise was fun but only could be used in fatigue warrior and turned those games into "who can find the I Win card first." Reno was loved ONLY because aggro was so horribly broken (partially due to LoE) that a card that completely destroyed it was acceptable. By the time the set rotated the pro community was long since happy to see it go in the same way people want to see Baku/Genn go.
One Night gave us a mage card that forced blizzard to completely revamp how they approach Arena just to manage, 1 mana Spirit Claws, and Purify. BARNES came from here.
And quality, too much trash in a set? expansions have less trash?!
Naxx had Dancing Swords, Anub'ar Ambusher, and TGT folks probably forgot how ANGRY paladins were for a year when their single class card to rescue the class was Avenge. Stoneskin Gargoyle is a card!
BRM jhad Hungry Dragon, Volcanic Drake, Volcanic Lumberer, and Majordomo.
LoE had Ancient Shade, Obsidian Destroyer, Arch-Thief Rafaam, and Dart Trap
People think of Purify in One Night but did you forget that Pantry Spider, Nightbane Templar, Menagerie Magician and all of those 'buff a murloc/beast/dragon' cards that didn't go anywhere came from here? Deadly Fork, Protect the King!, MOROES!, Arcanosmith, Ethereal Peddler @()$)(# I pride myself for remembering these cards and I forgot how many trash cards there were.
WHERE THE @*$)#*() do people get this "quality" business!
and by trash I don't mean 'memeworthy'. Prince Malchezaar isn't competitive but he was fun as anything and 'meme' or 'for fun' is a good reason for a card to exist. I tried to make those cards work for fun, and note I'm LOVING the spirits of this theme and have a pretty mean Spirit of the Dead priest deck I'm running right now. The above cards were trash for anyone. And I just grabbed the worst offenders: there's more.
A LOT of the Adventure cards were trash, and they got worse as they kept coming out. Many of our worst contenders for overpowered cards also came from those adventures which is why many remember these adventures having a 'high impact'. No one cares about the entire dragon theme being ignored when Grim Patron Warrior, and Emperor fueled mage and druid decks were all the rage. Overpowered cards do that. THat's why we were so happy with the death knights for the first month or so of Frozen Throne. Then realized we were stuck with them when rotation hit.
The adventures were a mix of some of the worst cards in the game and the most broken cards. The cards had to be standalone and powerful because trying to create a theme with 9 classes and 45 cards is IMPOSSIBLE. You CAN'T do anything interesting with only 2 cards in a class without making them high impact and high power level. So either you do put a card that's worthless until a full expansion can fix it (purify, avenge, voidcaller, Elise though she was fine since she relied on TGT and GvG) or you make something that completely warps the meta by himself (Mad Scientist, Emperor, Spirit Claws).
Larger expansions let you do things like what happened with spell hunter, where you can make a full set that's sort of good, then add more cards as you go on. Purify in Un'Goro would've been a fun meme that almost worked in tournaments as an addition to their deathrattle quest deck. Purify in an Adventure was a mockery that required an apology. Large expansions let you slip in cards like Hadronox, a card we laughed at during frozen throne bt didn't mind since Druid ALSO picked up UI, their DK, and other good cards.
put the point is, oh and
TL:DR summary
Adventures are FULL of utter trash cards. They are also full of utterly broken messes of cards which is why they were so 'high impact'. That's not quality, that's unbalanced.
The adventures got worse as they went on, making more trash and more broken mess to maintain a 'high impact'.
You can't make synergies well in adventures, thus the cards have to be standalone and broken or working with past decks. You also can't do 'sleepers' without REALLY pissing off the players.
Given our history, I don't get where the belief of "less cards mean better quality sets" means, unless they WANT more Undertakers and Tunnel Trog and believe that Firelands Portal was a good thing.
At BEST they are as bad as expansions, but with less to mess with over time. At worst they create exaggerate the problems. Experience has shown that they tend to be the latter and mostly only accepted in their day because they were either new or because their brokenness was better than what we already had thanks to some REALLY bad past sets.
So no, I don't see why we need LESS cards in our sets.
One does not simply walk into Mordor,
unless they want to be the best they can be.