Hearthpwn

Quote from Shadowrisen >>

Sooner or later, you may have to face the notion (if true) that ten losses in a row DOES reflect your skill combined with the lack of strength in the deck.  Hunterace himself couldn't get to legend with some of the memery out there.

On the broader subject of lack of skill in this game, I'll never understand why people latch onto that particular bit of masturbatory nihilism.  Hearthstone has a lower skill ceiling than Magic the Gathering, I grant you, but that's roughly akin to saying Differential Equations is an easier class to pass than Number Theory.  Statistically true, but practically useless information.

People should actually watch some of the GM League matches.  Last season, you could watch several iterations of each mirror matchup among the competitive meta decks, and if you pay enough attention and have enough knowledge of the game yourself, you can find one or two major errors in the highest levels of play with thousands of dollars on the line.  It's amazingly interesting to watch.

I suppose folks get the idea that skill is lacking in the game because there are certain specific matches where the game hinges on RNG.  If that is your philosophy, I laugh to think of how "skill-less" you must consider poker.  Games based on RNG are iterative processes.  No one particular game is guaranteed to reveal the player with the most skill.  Players must execute the correct plays numerous times, and sometimes those plays will not be sufficient to win, BUT win rates over time certainly show huge differences in levels of play.

 

It's relevant to point out that some folks just aren't cut out to handle games with an RNG element.  There are games, such as Starcraft, that reduce the influence of random factors down to functionally zero, and because of this, the better player will tend to win a MUCH higher amount than in Hearthstone, but this does not mean there aren't equally provable differences of skill in both games.  By the way, build order losses in Starcraft are NOT RNG.  They represent a conscious decision by one player to play greedily and leave the possibility open to be hard-countered by an opponent.

In any case, I realize that people who bitch about "no skill gamez" aren't susceptible to facts and evidence, but I can't resist sometimes.  It's disappointing to see, especially in a community I enjoy.  There are reasons the same players continue to post stellar results.  There are reasons you'll see someone take a deck with which you couldn't make Rank 5 if your life depended on it, and take that deck to #1 legend.  For that matter, there are reasons Brian Kibler single-handedly convinces people that Tess Greymane is part of the meta.

 

As a final thought, if anyone seriously despairs of substantiating the skill component of Hearthstone, I strongly recommend going to the Hearthstone eSports YT channel and looking up the 2017 World Championships.  In particular, the Quarter or Semi-Finals match between Frozen and Sintolol.  To this day, the greatest tournament match of this game I have ever seen.  If you want a challenge, spot the game-losing error Frozen makes that is not acknowledged by the casters.  Amazing match that most players on the ladder would have lost horribly on many different occasions throughout both sides of all games.

 I am not one of those people youre referring too in your post, but man...im gonna watch that match anyhow. You hyped it up haha.

OP is trolling us right? 

Nothing wrong with the floor format - it gives more incentive to play ranked. You can always just play casual mode if you don't like ranked.

who gives a shit?

Quote from Echtvad >>

OP is trolling us right? 

Nothing wrong with the floor format - it gives more incentive to play ranked. You can always just play casual mode if you don't like ranked.

 Only way to get skins in this game is play ranked. I don't get what's the problem with players like me, who suck and who meme having the option to turn the floor off?

I'm not trolling, but I'm not kidding. I am going to sit at rank 20 and after each win just-auto concede the next match so I can play in my bracket with shit decks I build. 

Quote from 1xbenx1 >>

Translation: I don't like losing.

 No I don't like being forced to be a bottom feeder at rank 15. Let me turn the floor off? How does that impact you guys out there that care about ranking?

Sooner or later, you may have to face the notion (if true) that ten losses in a row DOES reflect your skill combined with the lack of strength in the deck.  Hunterace himself couldn't get to legend with some of the memery out there.

I know I suck. I know I shouldn't be at rank 15. It is such an inconvenience to have to tank matches in the 20-16 bracket. Why can't I just turn off the damn floor? Like what the fuck is the problem? It's my gameplay experience. How am I going to learn to build better decks or play better if I'm getting shitted on at rank 15 over and over and over again? Fine I suck, well place me in a place where I belong not a bracket I'm going to get bullied in. 

this is the first time i read someone complaining about rank floors

i mean is one of the best changes ever made to this game (the list of good changes is very short tho)

Quote from kitox_me >>

this is the first time i read someone complaining about rank floors

i mean is one of the best changes ever made to this game (the list of good changes is very short tho)

Seriously, how does me turning it off negatively affect you or any other player that likes the feature? 

Quote from Shadowrisen >>

Sooner or later, you may have to face the notion (if true) that ten losses in a row DOES reflect your skill combined with the lack of strength in the deck.  Hunterace himself couldn't get to legend with some of the memery out there.

On the broader subject of lack of skill in this game, I'll never understand why people latch onto that particular bit of masturbatory nihilism.  Hearthstone has a lower skill ceiling than Magic the Gathering, I grant you, but that's roughly akin to saying Differential Equations is an easier class to pass than Number Theory.  Statistically true, but practically useless information.

People should actually watch some of the GM League matches.  Last season, you could watch several iterations of each mirror matchup among the competitive meta decks, and if you pay enough attention and have enough knowledge of the game yourself, you can find one or two major errors in the highest levels of play with thousands of dollars on the line.  It's amazingly interesting to watch.

I suppose folks get the idea that skill is lacking in the game because there are certain specific matches where the game hinges on RNG.  If that is your philosophy, I laugh to think of how "skill-less" you must consider poker.  Games based on RNG are iterative processes.  No one particular game is guaranteed to reveal the player with the most skill.  Players must execute the correct plays numerous times, and sometimes those plays will not be sufficient to win, BUT win rates over time certainly show huge differences in levels of play.

 

It's relevant to point out that some folks just aren't cut out to handle games with an RNG element.  There are games, such as Starcraft, that reduce the influence of random factors down to functionally zero, and because of this, the better player will tend to win a MUCH higher amount than in Hearthstone, but this does not mean there aren't equally provable differences of skill in both games.  By the way, build order losses in Starcraft are NOT RNG.  They represent a conscious decision by one player to play greedily and leave the possibility open to be hard-countered by an opponent.

In any case, I realize that people who bitch about "no skill gamez" aren't susceptible to facts and evidence, but I can't resist sometimes.  It's disappointing to see, especially in a community I enjoy.  There are reasons the same players continue to post stellar results.  There are reasons you'll see someone take a deck with which you couldn't make Rank 5 if your life depended on it, and take that deck to #1 legend.  For that matter, there are reasons Brian Kibler single-handedly convinces people that Tess Greymane is part of the meta.

 

As a final thought, if anyone seriously despairs of substantiating the skill component of Hearthstone, I strongly recommend going to the Hearthstone eSports YT channel and looking up the 2017 World Championships.  In particular, the Quarter or Semi-Finals match between Frozen and Sintolol.  To this day, the greatest tournament match of this game I have ever seen.  If you want a challenge, spot the game-losing error Frozen makes that is not acknowledged by the casters.  Amazing match that most players on the ladder would have lost horribly on many different occasions throughout both sides of all games.

 I love it when people try to sound smart. Kudos my man

Quote from MProdigy >>

Quote from Shadowrisen >>

Sooner or later, you may have to face the notion (if true) that ten losses in a row DOES reflect your skill combined with the lack of strength in the deck.  Hunterace himself couldn't get to legend with some of the memery out there.

On the broader subject of lack of skill in this game, I'll never understand why people latch onto that particular bit of masturbatory nihilism.  Hearthstone has a lower skill ceiling than Magic the Gathering, I grant you, but that's roughly akin to saying Differential Equations is an easier class to pass than Number Theory.  Statistically true, but practically useless information.

People should actually watch some of the GM League matches.  Last season, you could watch several iterations of each mirror matchup among the competitive meta decks, and if you pay enough attention and have enough knowledge of the game yourself, you can find one or two major errors in the highest levels of play with thousands of dollars on the line.  It's amazingly interesting to watch.

I suppose folks get the idea that skill is lacking in the game because there are certain specific matches where the game hinges on RNG.  If that is your philosophy, I laugh to think of how "skill-less" you must consider poker.  Games based on RNG are iterative processes.  No one particular game is guaranteed to reveal the player with the most skill.  Players must execute the correct plays numerous times, and sometimes those plays will not be sufficient to win, BUT win rates over time certainly show huge differences in levels of play.

 

It's relevant to point out that some folks just aren't cut out to handle games with an RNG element.  There are games, such as Starcraft, that reduce the influence of random factors down to functionally zero, and because of this, the better player will tend to win a MUCH higher amount than in Hearthstone, but this does not mean there aren't equally provable differences of skill in both games.  By the way, build order losses in Starcraft are NOT RNG.  They represent a conscious decision by one player to play greedily and leave the possibility open to be hard-countered by an opponent.

In any case, I realize that people who bitch about "no skill gamez" aren't susceptible to facts and evidence, but I can't resist sometimes.  It's disappointing to see, especially in a community I enjoy.  There are reasons the same players continue to post stellar results.  There are reasons you'll see someone take a deck with which you couldn't make Rank 5 if your life depended on it, and take that deck to #1 legend.  For that matter, there are reasons Brian Kibler single-handedly convinces people that Tess Greymane is part of the meta.

 

As a final thought, if anyone seriously despairs of substantiating the skill component of Hearthstone, I strongly recommend going to the Hearthstone eSports YT channel and looking up the 2017 World Championships.  In particular, the Quarter or Semi-Finals match between Frozen and Sintolol.  To this day, the greatest tournament match of this game I have ever seen.  If you want a challenge, spot the game-losing error Frozen makes that is not acknowledged by the casters.  Amazing match that most players on the ladder would have lost horribly on many different occasions throughout both sides of all games.

 I love it when people try to sound smart. Kudos my man

 This dude always posts like this, and it’s always just as entertaining.

Quote from Shadowrisen >>

Sooner or later, you may have to face the notion (if true) that ten losses in a row DOES reflect your skill combined with the lack of strength in the deck.  Hunterace himself couldn't get to legend with some of the memery out there.

On the broader subject of lack of skill in this game, I'll never understand why people latch onto that particular bit of masturbatory nihilism.  Hearthstone has a lower skill ceiling than Magic the Gathering, I grant you, but that's roughly akin to saying Differential Equations is an easier class to pass than Number Theory.  Statistically true, but practically useless information.

People should actually watch some of the GM League matches.  Last season, you could watch several iterations of each mirror matchup among the competitive meta decks, and if you pay enough attention and have enough knowledge of the game yourself, you can find one or two major errors in the highest levels of play with thousands of dollars on the line.  It's amazingly interesting to watch.

I suppose folks get the idea that skill is lacking in the game because there are certain specific matches where the game hinges on RNG.  If that is your philosophy, I laugh to think of how "skill-less" you must consider poker.  Games based on RNG are iterative processes.  No one particular game is guaranteed to reveal the player with the most skill.  Players must execute the correct plays numerous times, and sometimes those plays will not be sufficient to win, BUT win rates over time certainly show huge differences in levels of play.

 

It's relevant to point out that some folks just aren't cut out to handle games with an RNG element.  There are games, such as Starcraft, that reduce the influence of random factors down to functionally zero, and because of this, the better player will tend to win a MUCH higher amount than in Hearthstone, but this does not mean there aren't equally provable differences of skill in both games.  By the way, build order losses in Starcraft are NOT RNG.  They represent a conscious decision by one player to play greedily and leave the possibility open to be hard-countered by an opponent.

In any case, I realize that people who bitch about "no skill gamez" aren't susceptible to facts and evidence, but I can't resist sometimes.  It's disappointing to see, especially in a community I enjoy.  There are reasons the same players continue to post stellar results.  There are reasons you'll see someone take a deck with which you couldn't make Rank 5 if your life depended on it, and take that deck to #1 legend.  For that matter, there are reasons Brian Kibler single-handedly convinces people that Tess Greymane is part of the meta.

 

As a final thought, if anyone seriously despairs of substantiating the skill component of Hearthstone, I strongly recommend going to the Hearthstone eSports YT channel and looking up the 2017 World Championships.  In particular, the Quarter or Semi-Finals match between Frozen and Sintolol.  To this day, the greatest tournament match of this game I have ever seen.  If you want a challenge, spot the game-losing error Frozen makes that is not acknowledged by the casters.  Amazing match that most players on the ladder would have lost horribly on many different occasions throughout both sides of all games.

 is this the best post of all times ? skill MATTERS newbs

In poker does a player drop a joker card that memes the entire board with an rng magic show and single-handedly wins him the game... thoughts so.

You want the "good stuff" (skins etc.) but dont want to play casual mode? 

If you want something, just do something for it. And yes, thats the only way it works. 

Quote from Morr89 >>

You want the "good stuff" (skins etc.) but dont want to play casual mode? 

If you want something, just do something for it. And yes, thats the only way it works. 

Yeah it only works that way b/c its bad game design. Oh I will do it though. I'm going to sit at rank 20 next season and after each win purposefully concede and at the same time rope every fn turn.  

Okay mate so just do it. 

But why we have to know?

its called a conversation on a forum and im not your mate

Quote from Igotthis >>

In poker does a player drop a joker card that memes the entire board with an rng magic show and single-handedly wins him the game... thoughts so.

Puzzlebox is a 10 cost spell and I think that fact often escapes people's minds. It comes in the late game and takes up your whole turn, it is literally supposed to be used as an attempt to swing the game in your favour. You play Puzzlebox with the intention that you want to generate a tempo and/or card advantage swing (which the card is weighted to do based on the pool of available spells). You don't just draw it and think "yaaaaaas fireworks" *drops on board* unless you are a complete moron.

@MProdigy

That's kind of a sad commentary, man.  You think that post represented "trying to sound smart?"  The only word in the entire post that isn't within a well-read child's vocabulary is "iterative", and I use it because there isn't really a synonym that works.

Avoid excessive anxiety on the preceding subject; I will eschew unnecessarily pedantic terminology in future communication.

That sentence would maybe qualify as "trying to sound smart".  The post you replied to had a point that I couldn't have cut too many words and still made.

Glad I'm entertaining though; I aim to please.

As for the OP, the analogy to poker has nothing to do with any one card.  It has to do with a game having BOTH a high skill cap and a high reliance on RNG in the outcome of any one hand.  Puzzle Box of Yogg Saron clearing your board and leaving your opponent in great shape is no more or less RNG-based than hitting an inside straight draw or runner-runner into a nut flush.

I do agree with you, though.  There's nothing inherently degenerative to the game in disabling rank floors voluntarily.  Not sure you'll ever get your wish, but good luck.