It seems to be a good time to present few ideas to improve the game…
Please discuss:
1) Double the XP for wins. I get the point of having a system based on time spent on the game, but we need a bonus for wins. Doubling the XP in case of wins would be incentive, will not having the feeling to have waste my time if I loose.
2) Matchmaking of heroic duels based on current wins in the run. This new game mode is promising, even if not balanced yet. But having the matchmaking system based on MMR instead as being based on number of wins in the run (like for Arena) breaks the purpose of having a paid mode. Why would you play a game where the noob and the pro have the same 3-3 expectation?
3) Give a trial period (24h) to refund after crafting a card. The crafting system is very expansive, dust wise. By definition, you don’t own the cards that you craft, so you had no opportunity to test them. Sometimes, it is very disappointing to waste 1’600 dusts for a legendary for a special deck just to discover that it’s not as good as expected. Having a 24h refund period would help people to test new stuff while avoiding disappointement.
Hey, you just made a new account and your first post is constructive ideas for making the game better?
This must be some alternate reality, where up is down and dogs meow like cats... I need to wake up.
Well, before I do - I'll just say that I agree with your propositions. The dust situation has always been something on the hit list to be changed, but I wonder if they will ever consider it. A trial period to test a card seems like something that hurts no one and only benefits the player.
I don't really understand your point about heroic duels though, is it not already set up to match people based on where they are in a run? I mean, otherwise, you'd have people with way more cards/treasures than another person fighting each other. That really isn't fair.
1. you ask for ultra fast aggro to dominate the game
2. i dont get what you trying to say... i don't have any opinion on dules
3. i dont get this either..you just like the card a lot and you craft it and play it, if its bad try more, if it is still bad wait for next expansion.....it is ok thw ay it works, also You Tube and sites like HearthPwn can help you a lot to take decisions
I think the issue with a full dust refund within a time frame would encourage people to just have a stockpile of dust which allows them to craft any deck at all when they log on, play it, DE it and craft another as they please, and then just DE everything they crafted before they log off for the day.
It essentially allows one to have access to every card.
While I would love this, it unfortunately means that people won't have any more incentive to buy packs, apart from slightly reducing the time it takes to switch decks.
I do very much agree with your first point, though. It incentivises maximising your win-rate to earn xp, as opposed to wins per hour in the last system and time spent in the current one, and I feel that this is exactly what it should be. The last system encouraged aggro, the current one encourages bots that do nothing but pass, but your suggestion would encourage playing your best deck and actually playing it; learning to play it well.
The first two seem reasonable. I would imagine the grace period on crafting legendaries wouldn't be something Blizzard would consider, because they know there would be the perception that nothing positive had happened for the community, AND they would make less money.
What I mean is this. I'm thinking back in 2017 when Knights of the Frozen Throne comes out. Everyone is gaga over the new Death Knights, and I remember a lot of folks were especially excited about Rexxar and Jaina. But, if you recall the meta immediately following that release, anyone who had crafted either of those death knights and was concerned about competitive decks on the ladder would have almost certainly disenchanted them for the refund because both of them were utterly useless against the onslaught of Raza Priests and a few other popular decks.
Fast forward to certain points late in the KotFT lifespan in standard, and suddenly Rexxar and Jaina are two of the most powerful cards in the format. At this point one of two things happens. Either there is a recurring 24 hr grace period (in which case people could essentially scam the system by crafting and disenchanting over and over) OR a lot of the community has already used their grace period and the complaints start pouring in that "HOW COULD WE HAVE KNOWN????" when we used our unfairly-single chance to craft these things that they would be better later in the meta???
I think that's a fairly foreseeable consequence of that change, and especially after the drama with the reward track, I doubt if anything is going to get changed if there's a foreseeable way for the community to deny all credit for the positive step.
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.
There would have to be a cooldown or a 1 time use on trials, but that is definitely my favorite idea out of the three. This is a feature they should've had from the beginning.
They're already adjusting xp. Chill until we see what gets changed.
Linking people based on number of wins wouldnt work, because someone who is 6-2 would have two more loot cycles than someone who is 6-0 and would therefore have an advantage. Plus, the pool of people playing Heroic Duels probably isnt large enough to do that.
People have already stated why DE periods are a bad idea.
a) make people buy decks as documented by blizzard themselves
d) keep win rates at 50 % ( again as documented by them) which results in a rigged system as players think they are playing against a random opponent but in reality they were matched by the algorithm with a sole purpose of defining who wins or loses
There could be a trial mode. Active for 1 24-hour / 48-hour period per expac, when you can test whatever you want in non-ranked modes (access to all cards, or pick x number of legendaries and x epics to your collection for that time period). Then goes away after - gives you SOMETHING to try first and pretty controlled/limited.
Would be a good way to entice players to try things, get hooked, and want to spend dust/money (have to have something in it for Blizzard) to get those cards. You could add extended trial time periods for Battle Pass purchases. You can use your one trial period at any point in the expac.
It contains as detailed an explanation as I've seen or written regarding all the BS about the monetization system patent and all that stuff.
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.
1) Double the XP for wins. I get the point of having a system based on time spent on the game, but we need a bonus for wins. Doubling the XP in case of wins would be incentive, will not having the feeling to have waste my time if I loose.
Surely this makes losing even more of a waste of time? Since you are missing out on double the amount of XP. I don't "dislike" the idea of more XP per win, but I don't think it's necessary. You already get plenty of XP f you do the achievements and quests.
2) Matchmaking of heroic duels based on current wins in the run. This new game mode is promising, even if not balanced yet. But having the matchmaking system based on MMR instead as being based on number of wins in the run (like for Arena) breaks the purpose of having a paid mode. Why would you play a game where the noob and the pro have the same 3-3 expectation?
I've been asking for this since the start. In fact, the whole MMR system is frigging terrible and should never have been used (in ranked mode, Duels, and especially Battlegrounds. Playing 13k ranked players when I am still only at 1k literally killed the mode for me and I haven't been back to it since (when before the reset it was the only mode I ever played).
3) Give a trial period (24h) to refund after crafting a card. The crafting system is very expansive, dust wise. By definition, you don’t own the cards that you craft, so you had no opportunity to test them. Sometimes, it is very disappointing to waste 1’600 dusts for a legendary for a special deck just to discover that it’s not as good as expected. Having a 24h refund period would help people to test new stuff while avoiding disappointement.
"Expensive". And I agree - a "cool-off" period to test out a legendary (in case you discoiver that cool deck idea you had was an absolutely horrendous idea) is a good idea.
Apart from the XP doubling which I think is kind of just asking for an easier way to get gold and packs, etc, I agree with the suggestions and support.
It contains as detailed an explanation as I've seen or written regarding all the BS about the monetization system patent and all that stuff.
You magically appear when someone says anything about their business model... interesting... so you are telling us that matchmaking is random right??
not going to start this conversation again, people should just google activision matchmaking patent and you don’t have to be a rocket scientist to understand what it says.
Half the crafting cost and add a ticket system of runettera. Problem solved. And before u ask we get like 2.5 times more cards that 5 years ago to buy.
make a limited time period (4-8 weeks) where someone could buy for lets say something between 20-40 euros the entire neutral set + 1 class set (chosen randomly or discovered like in arena) to be available to them (so basically borrowed) after the limited time is up, you go back to only having the cards you own available and maybe you can choose a new class... at this time or maybe you need to wait for a cooldown in order to be able to use this feature again.
I think this feature would make the game more appealing to new players and returning players alike
and I would make it so that you turn does not end if your opponent concedes on your turn, (they will get to leave and you will get to finish your turn)
I don't really understand your point about heroic duels though, is it not already set up to match people based on where they are in a run? I mean, otherwise, you'd have people with way more cards/treasures than another person fighting each other. That really isn't fair.
Sorry if I wasn’t clear. In Arena, the matchmaking is based solely on the number of wins/loose in the current run, there is no MMR system. In Duels, free and paid, there is a MMR system so the matchmaking will give you an opponent that has the same number of matches in this run (to get the same number of treasures, etc.), but also on MMR. If I think it’s good for casual (free) mode, it should not be the case for the paid mode. Because whatever is your skill (measured by MMR), you will always have a 50% w/l ratio (so 3-3 on the run as expectation). Hope that is more clear now…
1. you ask for ultra fast aggro to dominate the game
No, doubling the XP for a win don’t push the aggro meta.
Combining XP based on game duration with a bonus for victory just avoid ropers.
If an aggro game last 5min (lets say that it reward 5xp to simplify) and a control game last 20 min (so it reward 20xp), then the bonus will just double it: 10xp for a 5 min victorious aggro game and 40xp for a 20 min victorious control game.
Apart from the XP doubling which I think is kind of just asking for an easier way to get gold and packs, etc, I agree with the suggestions and support.
Doubling the XP for victories is not just a ask for having more XP. It could be balanced by lowering down the "base XP" that you get per hour.
For example:
current system: 100 xp/hour as base xp (so you get 100x50% + 100*50% = 100 xp/hour in average)
new system: 66 xp/hour as base xp + double xp for victory (so you get 66*50% for games you loose + 132*50% for games you win = 100 xp/hour in average)
Apart from the XP doubling which I think is kind of just asking for an easier way to get gold and packs, etc, I agree with the suggestions and support.
Doubling the XP for victories is not just a ask for having more XP. It could be balanced by lowering down the "base XP" that you get per hour.
For example:
current system: 100 xp/hour as base xp (so you get 100x50% + 100*50% = 100 xp/hour in average)
new system: 66 xp/hour as base xp + double xp for victory (so you get 66*50% for games you loose + 132*50% for games you win = 100 xp/hour in average)
That sounds even worse - you're essentially making losing even more of a kick in the teeth for players. OP was trying to make losing more agreeable - with your suggestion, losing has an even more detrimental effect.
Hello,
It seems to be a good time to present few ideas to improve the game…
Please discuss:
1) Double the XP for wins. I get the point of having a system based on time spent on the game, but we need a bonus for wins. Doubling the XP in case of wins would be incentive, will not having the feeling to have waste my time if I loose.
2) Matchmaking of heroic duels based on current wins in the run. This new game mode is promising, even if not balanced yet. But having the matchmaking system based on MMR instead as being based on number of wins in the run (like for Arena) breaks the purpose of having a paid mode. Why would you play a game where the noob and the pro have the same 3-3 expectation?
3) Give a trial period (24h) to refund after crafting a card. The crafting system is very expansive, dust wise. By definition, you don’t own the cards that you craft, so you had no opportunity to test them. Sometimes, it is very disappointing to waste 1’600 dusts for a legendary for a special deck just to discover that it’s not as good as expected. Having a 24h refund period would help people to test new stuff while avoiding disappointement.
Does these propositons make sense for you?
Hey, you just made a new account and your first post is constructive ideas for making the game better?
This must be some alternate reality, where up is down and dogs meow like cats... I need to wake up.
Well, before I do - I'll just say that I agree with your propositions. The dust situation has always been something on the hit list to be changed, but I wonder if they will ever consider it. A trial period to test a card seems like something that hurts no one and only benefits the player.
I don't really understand your point about heroic duels though, is it not already set up to match people based on where they are in a run? I mean, otherwise, you'd have people with way more cards/treasures than another person fighting each other. That really isn't fair.
I didn’t see nerf demon hunter in your post. This definitely is bizarro hearthpwn.
hello
1. you ask for ultra fast aggro to dominate the game
2. i dont get what you trying to say... i don't have any opinion on dules
3. i dont get this either..you just like the card a lot and you craft it and play it, if its bad try more, if it is still bad wait for next expansion.....it is ok thw ay it works, also You Tube and sites like HearthPwn can help you a lot to take decisions
4. Delete PRIEST
I think the issue with a full dust refund within a time frame would encourage people to just have a stockpile of dust which allows them to craft any deck at all when they log on, play it, DE it and craft another as they please, and then just DE everything they crafted before they log off for the day.
It essentially allows one to have access to every card.
While I would love this, it unfortunately means that people won't have any more incentive to buy packs, apart from slightly reducing the time it takes to switch decks.
I do very much agree with your first point, though. It incentivises maximising your win-rate to earn xp, as opposed to wins per hour in the last system and time spent in the current one, and I feel that this is exactly what it should be.
The last system encouraged aggro, the current one encourages bots that do nothing but pass, but your suggestion would encourage playing your best deck and actually playing it; learning to play it well.
The first two seem reasonable. I would imagine the grace period on crafting legendaries wouldn't be something Blizzard would consider, because they know there would be the perception that nothing positive had happened for the community, AND they would make less money.
What I mean is this. I'm thinking back in 2017 when Knights of the Frozen Throne comes out. Everyone is gaga over the new Death Knights, and I remember a lot of folks were especially excited about Rexxar and Jaina. But, if you recall the meta immediately following that release, anyone who had crafted either of those death knights and was concerned about competitive decks on the ladder would have almost certainly disenchanted them for the refund because both of them were utterly useless against the onslaught of Raza Priests and a few other popular decks.
Fast forward to certain points late in the KotFT lifespan in standard, and suddenly Rexxar and Jaina are two of the most powerful cards in the format. At this point one of two things happens. Either there is a recurring 24 hr grace period (in which case people could essentially scam the system by crafting and disenchanting over and over) OR a lot of the community has already used their grace period and the complaints start pouring in that "HOW COULD WE HAVE KNOWN????" when we used our unfairly-single chance to craft these things that they would be better later in the meta???
I think that's a fairly foreseeable consequence of that change, and especially after the drama with the reward track, I doubt if anything is going to get changed if there's a foreseeable way for the community to deny all credit for the positive step.
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.
I don't really like the first one?
There's already an incentive for winning, climbing the ladder which gets you better rewards.
The rest... are okay? I think there's a lot they can do with legendary cards.
There would have to be a cooldown or a 1 time use on trials, but that is definitely my favorite idea out of the three. This is a feature they should've had from the beginning.
They're already adjusting xp. Chill until we see what gets changed.
Linking people based on number of wins wouldnt work, because someone who is 6-2 would have two more loot cycles than someone who is 6-0 and would therefore have an advantage. Plus, the pool of people playing Heroic Duels probably isnt large enough to do that.
People have already stated why DE periods are a bad idea.
Matchmaking is the biggest con - they use it to
a) make people buy decks as documented by blizzard themselves
d) keep win rates at 50 % ( again as documented by them) which results in a rigged system as players think they are playing against a random opponent but in reality they were matched by the algorithm with a sole purpose of defining who wins or loses
There could be a trial mode. Active for 1 24-hour / 48-hour period per expac, when you can test whatever you want in non-ranked modes (access to all cards, or pick x number of legendaries and x epics to your collection for that time period). Then goes away after - gives you SOMETHING to try first and pretty controlled/limited.
Would be a good way to entice players to try things, get hooked, and want to spend dust/money (have to have something in it for Blizzard) to get those cards. You could add extended trial time periods for Battle Pass purchases. You can use your one trial period at any point in the expac.
Thoughts? Any issues I’m not seeing?
#evidence?
Btw, I love how people say "keep win rates at 50%" as if that represents any more rigging than is true of any game with an MMR.
Unless you happen to be headed to literal rank #1 legend, the 50% win rate takes care of itself naturally. You just have to play enough games.
I know people are allergic to "walls of text", but folks should really check out post #4 on the following thread
An "Interesting" Video
It contains as detailed an explanation as I've seen or written regarding all the BS about the monetization system patent and all that stuff.
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.
Surely this makes losing even more of a waste of time? Since you are missing out on double the amount of XP.
I don't "dislike" the idea of more XP per win, but I don't think it's necessary. You already get plenty of XP f you do the achievements and quests.
I've been asking for this since the start. In fact, the whole MMR system is frigging terrible and should never have been used (in ranked mode, Duels, and especially Battlegrounds. Playing 13k ranked players when I am still only at 1k literally killed the mode for me and I haven't been back to it since (when before the reset it was the only mode I ever played).
"Expensive". And I agree - a "cool-off" period to test out a legendary (in case you discoiver that cool deck idea you had was an absolutely horrendous idea) is a good idea.
Apart from the XP doubling which I think is kind of just asking for an easier way to get gold and packs, etc, I agree with the suggestions and support.
You magically appear when someone says anything about their business model... interesting... so you are telling us that matchmaking is random right??
not going to start this conversation again, people should just google activision matchmaking patent and you don’t have to be a rocket scientist to understand what it says.
Half the crafting cost and add a ticket system of runettera. Problem solved.
And before u ask we get like 2.5 times more cards that 5 years ago to buy.
what I would do to improve the game
make a limited time period (4-8 weeks) where someone could buy for lets say something between 20-40 euros the entire neutral set + 1 class set (chosen randomly or discovered like in arena) to be available to them (so basically borrowed) after the limited time is up, you go back to only having the cards you own available and maybe you can choose a new class... at this time or maybe you need to wait for a cooldown in order to be able to use this feature again.
I think this feature would make the game more appealing to new players and returning players alike
and I would make it so that you turn does not end if your opponent concedes on your turn, (they will get to leave and you will get to finish your turn)
Sorry if I wasn’t clear. In Arena, the matchmaking is based solely on the number of wins/loose in the current run, there is no MMR system. In Duels, free and paid, there is a MMR system so the matchmaking will give you an opponent that has the same number of matches in this run (to get the same number of treasures, etc.), but also on MMR. If I think it’s good for casual (free) mode, it should not be the case for the paid mode. Because whatever is your skill (measured by MMR), you will always have a 50% w/l ratio (so 3-3 on the run as expectation). Hope that is more clear now…
No, doubling the XP for a win don’t push the aggro meta.
Combining XP based on game duration with a bonus for victory just avoid ropers.
If an aggro game last 5min (lets say that it reward 5xp to simplify) and a control game last 20 min (so it reward 20xp), then the bonus will just double it: 10xp for a 5 min victorious aggro game and 40xp for a 20 min victorious control game.
This way, you won’t be rewarded for roping…
Doubling the XP for victories is not just a ask for having more XP. It could be balanced by lowering down the "base XP" that you get per hour.
For example:
That sounds even worse - you're essentially making losing even more of a kick in the teeth for players. OP was trying to make losing more agreeable - with your suggestion, losing has an even more detrimental effect.