I've always wondered with people like you. Why the need to post some overly preached rant that leads into "I'm quitting" rather than just quitting. You know people will just make fun of you. You know that literally no one will notice you gone. So why.
Toodles. Losing bad players or how you would say it "loosing" bad players.. is all good. No one likes a whiner. If you don't like it then leave. No need to make a post about it.
I don't like cinnamon but there are foods out there with cinnamon. I don't go on the internet and post about my dislike of cinnamon each time. Or by your example.. whine and cry about it... I just don't buy it. The truth is that no one cares why you don't like this game or that you are leaving.
No one cares that I don't like cinnamon. My friends eat it in front of me all the time. My own wife even buys it and I have to deal with it in my own house. What a spiteful witch :p
Take care and learn a good lesson about the world around you; No one cares what you don't like. No one cares that you are leaving. More people would care if you had something positive positive to say. But you don't.
Wow, synthetik, your wife seems like a serious bitch. Fucking cinnamon ?!?
On a more serious note, there really is this grab bag of words from which people draw randomly to complain. We have "rng", "overpowered", "polarizing" . . . all kinds of things like that. What bothers me is not that the words are used, but that each of these words has an objective meaning, and those meanings are almost never applied correctly.
OP lists a few decks that were, in fact, overpowered. RNG was in no way related to that issue.
Furthermore, ever since Witchwood there has been a distinct improvement in meta diversity and general health, and NO, that is not in any way, shape, or form an opinion statement. We might have a few disagreements on the particulars of the definition of "meta health", but the general concept is objective and provable. And yes, sure, there are plenty of knee-jerk retorts about Baku meta and Dr. Boom meta and blah blah blah, but that simply doesn't change the truth of what I just said, and it's easy enough to go back and see it for yourself if you're so inclined.
Have a nice day.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Helpful Clarification on Forbidden Topics for Hearthstone Forums:
Enjoying Americans winning in the Olympics is forbidden because it is political. A 14 plus page discussion of state-sponsored lawsuits against a multi-national corporation based on harassment, discrimination, and wrongful death allegations is apparently not political enough to raise an issue.
All of you guys angry on here because he made some valid points and you don't want to admit it lol. He shared honest opinions that many people share, and you can't handle a serious discussion.
All of you guys angry on here because he made some valid points and you don't want to admit it lol. He shared honest opinions that many people share, and you can't handle a serious discussion.
No one is angry other than the OP. Valid points? No. No valid points were made. Shadowrisen made some good points and yeah Shadow.. f'ng cinnamon!! lol
The OP titled it RNG shit show yet all the decks he referenced aren't RNG based. He seems upset that he didn't pull the right card at the right time. Seems that's his beef with the game. That is not a valid point in any way to criticize a CCG. Card games are always about what card you pull. Even going past CCG into regular card games like blackjack.. all about the cards you get and what you do with them (hit, stay, split).
It seems he is upset he cannot beat the decks that are out there which isn't RNG's fault. It is his fault for not playing a good deck or just being bad at the game. Both can be fixed. While I do find OTK decks frustrating to play against they aren't the majority out there and most of the decks are beatable and if you play smartly you are capable of winning 50 to 60% of the time which is the norm for Hearthstone.
People don't seem to understand that it is okay to lose and everyone will lose matches. Those who got to legend didn't just hop on and sail their way up there. It takes time.. a good amount of time to get there even with the win streak star bonus. Even streamers who make a living off of playing Hearthstone daily and for multiple hours. Watch them and see how long it takes to get up to legend even starting off at rank 5 or even 3 at the start of the month.
The deck you pick to play matters. If you join a baseball game and everyone is using aluminum bats and you show up with a stick you plucked off a tree... you're not going to have a good time.
I am NOT quitting to summarize the first few answers. I will be playing way less, since R5 to Legend in Standart and Wild EU servers are crowded with TiptheWin Paladin and Secret Mages.
What is not RNG in Tip the Scales Paladin? You play Lens in 4 and you get 75%+ WR in HSreplay. Is this balanced and non RNG based? It's the first time in the game history the top aggro deck plays a Reno type highlander card like Zephyris and the other card like chief Nomi - cards that require specific decks are auto-include in Aggro deck if the RNG isn't enough on your favor aka you drop 2 Scales and they have 2 board clears. So we got Zephyris and Nomi for end-game in T7 above. If I remember correct Divine Favor got HOF-ed for the ability to give Paladin refill in Aggro/Control matchup to catch up if they failed to snowball...
In Wild Secret Mage is just overpowered - much like Big Priest Aluneth, Stargazer Luna and now the AoE secret and the draw 2 RNG win-mirror if you hit Counterspell is OP. Just an example the deck can be RNG winning is Lackey > Counterspell T1 , fuck up Druid/Shaman Q and auto-win = RNG. And the draw mechanics of the deck are the best, since Blizz supported the archetype like resurrect one for several expansions to the OP chimera we face now.
Again: I've always wondered with people like you. Why the need to post some overly preached rant that leads into "I'm quitting" rather than just quitting. You know people will just make fun of you. You know that literally no one will notice you gone. So why.
And you saying "GL to those that stay" would by any competent person be inferred as you are quitting.
I am already breaking a personal rule of delving in deeper than my initial response. But as they say, here goes nothing.
"The game is at the worst possible RNG state now."
I will not flood this response with every situation that disproves this comment, but for some quick examples: Ragnaros winning highly competitive tournament games with any result other than a 10% being a loss. Brawl having a chance to be a 5 mana Twisting Nether that preserves one of your minions. (Though you could latch onto this statement to reinforce your own point as it is still seeing play today). Spiteful Summoner had arguably one of the greatest high roll potentials of any minion in the game. Hell, I'll even poor one out for my boy Nat Pagle. A turn two Nat who decides to fish with dynamite was almost an instant win back then.
"You play Lens in 4 and you get 75%+ WR in HSreplay."
This is the final point I would like to address. This statement is completely irrelevant unless you want to complain about nearly any card game in history. Here you're basically just saying that if you get a strong draw you have a better chance to win. Keleseth, nearly every Reno card, Wild Growth, Undertaker, old Fiery War Axe, Tunnel Trog, Northshire Cleric, you get the point are all cards that, when in your opening hand, increase your win rate measurably higher than otherwise. You cannot make a claim that drawing well is bad for a card game. Because, other than making the best choices you can, that is the biggest component of card games.
In this thread like many others crawls with pseudo-knowledgeable comments.
.. What bothers me is not that the words are used, but that each of these words has an objective meaning, and those meanings are almost never applied correctly....Furthermore, ever since Witchwood there has been a distinct improvement in meta diversity and general health, and NO, that is not in any way, shape, or form an opinion statement. We might have a few disagreements on the particulars of the definition of "meta health", but the general concept is objective and provable. ....
....Card games are always about what card you pull. Even going past CCG into regular card games like blackjack.. all about the cards you get and what you do with them (hit, stay, split)....
...I will not flood this response with every situation that disproves this comment, but for some quick examples: Ragnaroswinning highly competitive tournament games with any result other than a 10% being a loss. Brawl having a chance to be a 5 mana Twisting Nether that preserves one of your minions....
Comments like the above should in someway disprove OP' statements about RNG, but they don't. More likely only to ridicule whilst putting the responder in the position of knowledgeable about the game. The theory of Evolution of the universe and human kind explains a lot but is still a theory, Most people settle for it because it is the best we have. But that doesn't mean we know the truth about how things really work. There is a difference between a satisfactory explanation and the truth.
The same with Blizzard and Hearthstone. We assume RNG is what is is: random. But is it? We simply don't know. We can see a deck of cards being shuffled playing poker. We simply cannot designate the same kind of confidence towards RNG in Hearthstone. Nobody knows exactly how RHG works, if it is not rigged as it is a carefully hidden secret. Is random generator like a well balanced dice thrown giving random results? Most of us assume that, but we don't really know....
With Zephrys Blizzard proved they can rig the board state, with all kind of unpleasant consequences in the field of skill and strategy (another subject). Who refuses to accept there isn't a kind of zephryfication going on in RNG? All to keep desired win rate balance, pace of the game, aggression-status in ranked play. Nobody can proof or disprove this statement. There is no reason to believe Blizzards comments about RNG. If we do, it is because we want to, not because non-rigging had been irrefutably proved.
People making these threads use RNG as way to be dissatisfied about something else. That their skill is not being honored as they don't belong to the target audience.
10 out of 10 times I d rather play against tip the scales pala than a T4 coin pre neef galaxy...at least it s a board you can interact with. And if you draw shit and opponent draws well...then you lose- thats how card games go- inevitebly the player w better draws wins. If you want to play a game with 0 rng then you should play chess- and even there the player playing white has a slight advantage. Nothing is 50/50 and balanced
"You play Lens in 4 and you get 75%+ WR in HSreplay."
This is the final point I would like to address. This statement is completely irrelevant unless you want to complain about nearly any card game in history. Here you're basically just saying that if you get a strong draw you have a better chance to win. Keleseth, nearly every Reno card, Wild Growth, Undertaker, old Fiery War Axe, Tunnel Trog, Northshire Cleric, you get the point are all cards that, when in your opening hand, increase your win rate measurably higher than otherwise. You cannot make a claim that drawing well is bad for a card game. Because, other than making the best choices you can, that is the biggest component of card games.
While in general I feel the OP is a little over the top in the overall scheme of their post, I do disagree with you on this point. Of course drawing well isn't a problem in card games (if I open with my best 1 drop, 2 drop and 3 drop as an aggressive deck, or open with all my early game removal tools as a Control deck against aggro, I would expect to have an easier game), but the existence of single cards that produce win rate spikes as high as 65% (Prismatic Lens) or even >70% (pre-nerf Pocket Galaxy) by themselves when they appear in the opening hand certainly is a problem.
If I get a god hand and have a landslide victory every once in a while, its no big deal, that's all a part of playing CCGs. However if I am able to punish my opponent because I randomly had a copy of one specific card in my opening hand that improves my win rate from 50% to 70%, that is not fair or balanced gameplay. There is a significant difference between Northshire Cleric and Prince Keleseth. One of these cards is simply a good early game option that boosts your win rate a couple of % when drawn with the right supporting cards, while the other was a major problem, which spiked your win rate ludicrously when drawn by itself.
That said I think the Murloc Paladin deck is pretty trash and has hyper inflated win rates because it is very good against greedy decks (which are popular at the moment), and players with low skill and/or who tilt easily, but opening lens can, in some circumstances, still seal the game from the first turn which is unacceptable.
As the OP freely admits, this is more of a rant than a thread. We have a place for getting salt off our chests. And this isnt going to go anywhere useful.
Locked.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
The game is at the worst possible RNG state now...
High Legend Ladder is just which Paladin draws first Tip the Win...
Wild is not better with all those roaming secret mages, it's either you get the Secret Eater on curve or you loose.
No matter hotfixes, buffs and new expansions for straight 5 years we have either overtuned deck as top or an RNG instawin deck...
WSG commander Molten Warrior in beta, Undertaker Hunter in Naxx, Miracle Rogue with Leeroy at 4, Midrange Shaman, Dragon Priest, Pirate Warrior, Odd Paladin, Christmas Paladin...
There was always ONE overtuned deck Fotm that had ZERO viable counters except 1 or 2 tech cards that you pray to get...
It's a more rant than normal thread, but I had my share for this expansion. GL to those that stay.
I've always wondered with people like you. Why the need to post some overly preached rant that leads into "I'm quitting" rather than just quitting. You know people will just make fun of you. You know that literally no one will notice you gone. So why.
RNG the excuse of bad players
So you have trouble with the player that draws better generally winning in a card game?
Toodles. Losing bad players or how you would say it "loosing" bad players.. is all good.
No one likes a whiner. If you don't like it then leave. No need to make a post about it.
I don't like cinnamon but there are foods out there with cinnamon. I don't go on the internet and post about my dislike of cinnamon each time. Or by your example.. whine and cry about it... I just don't buy it. The truth is that no one cares why you don't like this game or that you are leaving.
No one cares that I don't like cinnamon. My friends eat it in front of me all the time. My own wife even buys it and I have to deal with it in my own house. What a spiteful witch :p
Take care and learn a good lesson about the world around you; No one cares what you don't like. No one cares that you are leaving.
More people would care if you had something positive positive to say. But you don't.
Wow, synthetik, your wife seems like a serious bitch. Fucking cinnamon ?!?
On a more serious note, there really is this grab bag of words from which people draw randomly to complain. We have "rng", "overpowered", "polarizing" . . . all kinds of things like that. What bothers me is not that the words are used, but that each of these words has an objective meaning, and those meanings are almost never applied correctly.
OP lists a few decks that were, in fact, overpowered. RNG was in no way related to that issue.
Furthermore, ever since Witchwood there has been a distinct improvement in meta diversity and general health, and NO, that is not in any way, shape, or form an opinion statement. We might have a few disagreements on the particulars of the definition of "meta health", but the general concept is objective and provable. And yes, sure, there are plenty of knee-jerk retorts about Baku meta and Dr. Boom meta and blah blah blah, but that simply doesn't change the truth of what I just said, and it's easy enough to go back and see it for yourself if you're so inclined.
Have a nice day.
Helpful Clarification on Forbidden Topics for Hearthstone Forums:
Enjoying Americans winning in the Olympics is forbidden because it is political. A 14 plus page discussion of state-sponsored lawsuits against a multi-national corporation based on harassment, discrimination, and wrongful death allegations is apparently not political enough to raise an issue.
All of you guys angry on here because he made some valid points and you don't want to admit it lol. He shared honest opinions that many people share, and you can't handle a serious discussion.
No one is angry other than the OP.
Valid points? No. No valid points were made. Shadowrisen made some good points and yeah Shadow.. f'ng cinnamon!! lol
The OP titled it RNG shit show yet all the decks he referenced aren't RNG based. He seems upset that he didn't pull the right card at the right time.
Seems that's his beef with the game. That is not a valid point in any way to criticize a CCG. Card games are always about what card you pull. Even going past CCG into regular card games like blackjack.. all about the cards you get and what you do with them (hit, stay, split).
It seems he is upset he cannot beat the decks that are out there which isn't RNG's fault. It is his fault for not playing a good deck or just being bad at the game. Both can be fixed. While I do find OTK decks frustrating to play against they aren't the majority out there and most of the decks are beatable and if you play smartly you are capable of winning 50 to 60% of the time which is the norm for Hearthstone.
People don't seem to understand that it is okay to lose and everyone will lose matches. Those who got to legend didn't just hop on and sail their way up there. It takes time.. a good amount of time to get there even with the win streak star bonus.
Even streamers who make a living off of playing Hearthstone daily and for multiple hours. Watch them and see how long it takes to get up to legend even starting off at rank 5 or even 3 at the start of the month.
The deck you pick to play matters. If you join a baseball game and everyone is using aluminum bats and you show up with a stick you plucked off a tree... you're not going to have a good time.
I am NOT quitting to summarize the first few answers. I will be playing way less, since R5 to Legend in Standart and Wild EU servers are crowded with TiptheWin Paladin and Secret Mages.
What is not RNG in Tip the Scales Paladin? You play Lens in 4 and you get 75%+ WR in HSreplay. Is this balanced and non RNG based? It's the first time in the game history the top aggro deck plays a Reno type highlander card like Zephyris and the other card like chief Nomi - cards that require specific decks are auto-include in Aggro deck if the RNG isn't enough on your favor aka you drop 2 Scales and they have 2 board clears. So we got Zephyris and Nomi for end-game in T7 above. If I remember correct Divine Favor got HOF-ed for the ability to give Paladin refill in Aggro/Control matchup to catch up if they failed to snowball...
In Wild Secret Mage is just overpowered - much like Big Priest Aluneth, Stargazer Luna and now the AoE secret and the draw 2 RNG win-mirror if you hit Counterspell is OP. Just an example the deck can be RNG winning is Lackey > Counterspell T1 , fuck up Druid/Shaman Q and auto-win = RNG. And the draw mechanics of the deck are the best, since Blizz supported the archetype like resurrect one for several expansions to the OP chimera we face now.
ppl keep complaining about murloc paladin aka the noob eater ?
Again: I've always wondered with people like you. Why the need to post some overly preached rant that leads into "I'm quitting" rather than just quitting. You know people will just make fun of you. You know that literally no one will notice you gone. So why.
And you saying "GL to those that stay" would by any competent person be inferred as you are quitting.
I am already breaking a personal rule of delving in deeper than my initial response. But as they say, here goes nothing.
"The game is at the worst possible RNG state now."
I will not flood this response with every situation that disproves this comment, but for some quick examples: Ragnaros winning highly competitive tournament games with any result other than a 10% being a loss. Brawl having a chance to be a 5 mana Twisting Nether that preserves one of your minions. (Though you could latch onto this statement to reinforce your own point as it is still seeing play today). Spiteful Summoner had arguably one of the greatest high roll potentials of any minion in the game. Hell, I'll even poor one out for my boy Nat Pagle. A turn two Nat who decides to fish with dynamite was almost an instant win back then.
"You play Lens in 4 and you get 75%+ WR in HSreplay."
This is the final point I would like to address. This statement is completely irrelevant unless you want to complain about nearly any card game in history. Here you're basically just saying that if you get a strong draw you have a better chance to win. Keleseth, nearly every Reno card, Wild Growth, Undertaker, old Fiery War Axe, Tunnel Trog, Northshire Cleric, you get the point are all cards that, when in your opening hand, increase your win rate measurably higher than otherwise. You cannot make a claim that drawing well is bad for a card game. Because, other than making the best choices you can, that is the biggest component of card games.
You are right.
At some point, vs some kind of decks, there is no counterplay.
the most pathetic posts are those who say "no one cares you're gone" but also feel the urge to post a freaking WALL OF ARROGANT BS to the guy.
seems you care a lot and you should be made fun of lol
In this thread like many others crawls with pseudo-knowledgeable comments.
Comments like the above should in someway disprove OP' statements about RNG, but they don't. More likely only to ridicule whilst putting the responder in the position of knowledgeable about the game. The theory of Evolution of the universe and human kind explains a lot but is still a theory, Most people settle for it because it is the best we have. But that doesn't mean we know the truth about how things really work. There is a difference between a satisfactory explanation and the truth.
The same with Blizzard and Hearthstone. We assume RNG is what is is: random. But is it? We simply don't know. We can see a deck of cards being shuffled playing poker. We simply cannot designate the same kind of confidence towards RNG in Hearthstone. Nobody knows exactly how RHG works, if it is not rigged as it is a carefully hidden secret. Is random generator like a well balanced dice thrown giving random results? Most of us assume that, but we don't really know....
With Zephrys Blizzard proved they can rig the board state, with all kind of unpleasant consequences in the field of skill and strategy (another subject). Who refuses to accept there isn't a kind of zephryfication going on in RNG? All to keep desired win rate balance, pace of the game, aggression-status in ranked play. Nobody can proof or disprove this statement. There is no reason to believe Blizzards comments about RNG. If we do, it is because we want to, not because non-rigging had been irrefutably proved.
People making these threads use RNG as way to be dissatisfied about something else. That their skill is not being honored as they don't belong to the target audience.
We make our world significant through the courage of our questions and the depth of our answers.
10 out of 10 times I d rather play against tip the scales pala than a T4 coin pre neef galaxy...at least it s a board you can interact with. And if you draw shit and opponent draws well...then you lose- thats how card games go- inevitebly the player w better draws wins. If you want to play a game with 0 rng then you should play chess- and even there the player playing white has a slight advantage. Nothing is 50/50 and balanced
While in general I feel the OP is a little over the top in the overall scheme of their post, I do disagree with you on this point. Of course drawing well isn't a problem in card games (if I open with my best 1 drop, 2 drop and 3 drop as an aggressive deck, or open with all my early game removal tools as a Control deck against aggro, I would expect to have an easier game), but the existence of single cards that produce win rate spikes as high as 65% (Prismatic Lens) or even >70% (pre-nerf Pocket Galaxy) by themselves when they appear in the opening hand certainly is a problem.
If I get a god hand and have a landslide victory every once in a while, its no big deal, that's all a part of playing CCGs. However if I am able to punish my opponent because I randomly had a copy of one specific card in my opening hand that improves my win rate from 50% to 70%, that is not fair or balanced gameplay. There is a significant difference between Northshire Cleric and Prince Keleseth. One of these cards is simply a good early game option that boosts your win rate a couple of % when drawn with the right supporting cards, while the other was a major problem, which spiked your win rate ludicrously when drawn by itself.
That said I think the Murloc Paladin deck is pretty trash and has hyper inflated win rates because it is very good against greedy decks (which are popular at the moment), and players with low skill and/or who tilt easily, but opening lens can, in some circumstances, still seal the game from the first turn which is unacceptable.
How do people keep losing to Murloc Paladin? It follows the exact same pattern every time...
Dad, husband, gamer, fueled by coffee.
Currently playing Dragon Galakrond Priest, Dragon Galakrond Warrior and Highlander Dragon Hunter.
well we are playing a .. card game..
As the OP freely admits, this is more of a rant than a thread. We have a place for getting salt off our chests.
And this isnt going to go anywhere useful.
Locked.