A post which is complaining about people complaining and attacking people personally (calling them pussies) who attack people personally. Sounds like you are part of the problem.
Well said. If ops post hadn't been laden with thinly veiled insults pointed towards the people and issues that obviously annoy him it may have been an interesting topic.
Its not about what annoys me personally though because its not all about me and that's the whole point! Its more about the direction the game is heading as a result of the way the community behaves rather than my personal grievances. People on the internet are always going to be whiny and toxic just because that's how the internet is. The core community of HS for the most part were never like that, that I can recall at least. At the very least we could all pull together in the past for a common cause, these days we can hardly even agree on a common cause let alone pull together as a community. Maybe it was always like that and I'm completely wrong and just didn't notice because blizzard didn't pay them enough attention.
People are just missing the point here - perhaps I could have worded things better. But in a nutshell, people complain not to make the game better but to make their own experience better and do it in a manner where they are unwilling to concede their point regardless of what argument someone throws at them.
And as expected the response to this thread just further proves this point - some of the replies and just people making sly jabs at myself and offering no real substance to their response. I appreciate the people who have taken the time to actually write something of substance and offer their opinion, whether they agree with me or not, I respect them all the same.
At the end of the day the only thing I want to see is HS in the best position it can be and not a game dictated entirely by the community. Blizzard are starting to concede with a lot of the demands lately and it just makes the situation worse.
And I'll say it one final time - I'm not against whining (this post is entirely me whining about something). I'm just disappointed with the way the community is right now, there's too much self entitlement. And if people cant determine the distinction between those two statements, feel free to post a jab, I won't take offence. Otherwise, if you disagree with what I've said and actually have something interesting to say in response then please post it because I'm always open to the other side of the argument, I have no problem whatsoever admitting when I'm wrong.
I don't think Ben Brode is some kind of demigod, but it’s clear the game was developed with a lot of love and care, year's of balancing and tweaking went into getting the game to match Team 5’s vision. That has gone now, 3 expansions and 3 mini sets per year with an ever expanding list of balancing problems added each time, all the time ignoring the fundamentals of the original game. All the AMA's in the world won’t change that.
Yeah, undertaker meta, patron meta, grand tournament being a useless expansion barring from 3 cards, etc..
There was surely a lot of love and care and years of balancing and tweaking, sure
I thought with my post being short it wouldn’t have been misconstrued but I should have known better.
I didn’t love the first few expansion but they largely followed the foundations laid down by the original game. In recent years the design team have tossed that completely out of the window. Card draw and card generation now doesn’t even have to have a cost, absurd amounts of mana can be cheated out by most of the roster, stats can be piled onto the board faster and earlier, competitive RNG is a constant factor. The game’s direction has changed massively, imo for the worst.
I thought with my post being short it wouldn’t have been misconstrued but I should have known better.
I didn’t love the first few expansion but they largely followed the foundations laid down by the original game. In recent years the design team have tossed that completely out of the window. Card draw and card generation now doesn’t even have to have a cost, absurd amounts of mana can be cheated out by most of the roster, stats can be piled onto the board faster and earlier, competitive RNG is a constant factor. The game’s direction has changed massively, imo for the worst.
I can get where you're coming from. From a personal stand point, I disagree, I've gradually gotten more and more engaged with the game over the last few years and it's now at a point where I play it consistently in some form, for most of the year. Previously I'd find myself breaking for 2/3/4 months at a time because I had gotten bored. I can't say the game is objectively better, just that from my perspective, I've found a lot of the cards and things you can do a lot more fun than previously. I also feel like there are way more viable decks and archetypes now. I coukd be wrong on that but when I started playing, it seemed like everyone pretty much played one of the top few classes and I saw a lot of the same decks. I do see a good variety now and have played different archetypes with most classes within one expansion cycle.
I agree with most of what you said. I have always been annoyed with people, who can't be grateful for anything. As has already been pointed out, Blizzard is gradually becoming more open with their fans and actively respond to their criticism. In my opinion Year of the Dragon was the time when their approach started changing and as much I loved Hearthstone "back in the days", noone can't deny that for the first few years the game was treated by the developers as a side project to WoW. I remember that about 2 year's ago (Shudder meta) I myself was often critisising Blizzard, as they were clearly deserving of it. However, now with them actively improving, I can't stand people, who only whine, because something is not the way they want it to be.
I thought with my post being short it wouldn’t have been misconstrued but I should have known better.
I didn’t love the first few expansion but they largely followed the foundations laid down by the original game. In recent years the design team have tossed that completely out of the window. Card draw and card generation now doesn’t even have to have a cost, absurd amounts of mana can be cheated out by most of the roster, stats can be piled onto the board faster and earlier, competitive RNG is a constant factor. The game’s direction has changed massively, imo for the worst.
I can get where you're coming from. From a personal stand point, I disagree, I've gradually gotten more and more engaged with the game over the last few years and it's now at a point where I play it consistently in some form, for most of the year. Previously I'd find myself breaking for 2/3/4 months at a time because I had gotten bored. I can't say the game is objectively better, just that from my perspective, I've found a lot of the cards and things you can do a lot more fun than previously. I also feel like there are way more viable decks and archetypes now. I coukd be wrong on that but when I started playing, it seemed like everyone pretty much played one of the top few classes and I saw a lot of the same decks. I do see a good variety now and have played different archetypes with most classes within one expansion cycle.
A lot of really cool things have been added, Classic HS looks very vanilla nowadays even though I prefer the pacing of the games. I can see why the modern game appeals to people. It’s a lot faster, crazier, and far more reliant on huge swing turns and big plays.
I don’t want to trash the current design team, a lot of what they do is very positive. I just wish they would show a bit of restraint with the power level of their cards.
I thought with my post being short it wouldn’t have been misconstrued but I should have known better.
I didn’t love the first few expansion but they largely followed the foundations laid down by the original game. In recent years the design team have tossed that completely out of the window. Card draw and card generation now doesn’t even have to have a cost, absurd amounts of mana can be cheated out by most of the roster, stats can be piled onto the board faster and earlier, competitive RNG is a constant factor. The game’s direction has changed massively, imo for the worst.
I can get where you're coming from. From a personal stand point, I disagree, I've gradually gotten more and more engaged with the game over the last few years and it's now at a point where I play it consistently in some form, for most of the year. Previously I'd find myself breaking for 2/3/4 months at a time because I had gotten bored. I can't say the game is objectively better, just that from my perspective, I've found a lot of the cards and things you can do a lot more fun than previously. I also feel like there are way more viable decks and archetypes now. I coukd be wrong on that but when I started playing, it seemed like everyone pretty much played one of the top few classes and I saw a lot of the same decks. I do see a good variety now and have played different archetypes with most classes within one expansion cycle.
A lot of really cool things have been added, Classic HS looks very vanilla nowadays even though I prefer the pacing of the games. I can see why the modern game appeals to people. It’s a lot faster, crazier, and far more reliant on huge swing turns and big plays.
I don’t want to trash the current design team, a lot of what they do is very positive. I just wish they would show a bit of restraint with the power level of their cards.
It seems like they realise this themselves to be fair. Someone else mentioned in the AMAs they've openly said they've messed up on certain things or got power levels wrong etc which I think is fair enough. I recall it being mentioned that if there is enough clamour for nax to be added to classic then that's something they could be open to and maybe hearthstone classic will develop into something more appealing for people wanting a bit of time with less crazy stuff.
It seems to me that they are wanting to develop more and more rather than scale back and wind down. Hearthstone seems to be developing into a platform you can go and just play strategy games. Some will stick to one or two of those, others like myself will find something in most content so I'll probably flit about the different modes but predominantly stick with standard.
I sympathise with them to a degree because after you've developed over a thousand or two thousand cards, it must be a really rough balance to keep things fresh and interesting, in reaidng power levels and crazy effects seems like the obvious starting point. I saw a lot of people say barren looks boring etc and so if they look to reduce the power, it's boring, if they don't, it's busted. Feels like they are caught between a rock and a hard place at times.
I do get why people would dislike high power level cards. It's just personal taste that I like them. I like having choices and decisions to make, if a deck can play out differently in most games then that's probably something I'll play a lot of. I already miss the mage quest we lost with this rotation. As much as it wasn't a competitive card, I loved being able to effectively lucky dip every turn and potentially find answers to problems I otherwise wouldn't be able to.
I agree with most of what you said. I have always been annoyed with people, who can't be grateful for anything. As has already been pointed out, Blizzard is gradually becoming more open with their fans and actively respond to their criticism. In my opinion Year of the Dragon was the time when their approach started changing and as much I loved Hearthstone "back in the days", noone can't deny that for the first few years the game was treated by the developers as a side project to WoW. I remember that about 2 year's ago (Shudder meta) I myself was often critisising Blizzard, as they were clearly deserving of it. However, now with them actively improving, I can't stand people, who only whine, because something is not the way they want it to be.
Yeah I can see where you're coming from blizzard were the complete opposite when the game was first released, I think it took them like 2 expansions to nerf undertaker (should have been nerfed long before it was). They've improved a lot since then - I just hope they don't go full 180 and start changing everything the community wants because if they start adhering to fan service the game takes a huge nose dive (just like how everything associated with fan service does).
One other thing I guess I didn't consider is that there has been a whole new generation of people since the game was released and people on the internet are just more self entitled and toxic in general these days. I blame it on social media and the counter culture movements which are forever ongoing. If you've been on twitter over the past couple of year you'll know what I mean. Most people see themselves as intellectually superior to everyone else, its petty. That wasn't the way I was raised and I'm damn proud of that fact. It's scary to think how warped the minds the youth of today can be because of the internet but that's an entirely different topic for an entirely different day!
Tickatus is the worst card ever because it locks out all other control decks. I will never relent. It has made me like the entire game far less than I would. I have never ever wanted a nerf more than to Tickatus of any game, any CCG, ever. I absolutely loathe the card and wish they just moved it to Wild or make it 9 mana or destroy their own cards. Anything.
I agree with most of what you said. I have always been annoyed with people, who can't be grateful for anything. As has already been pointed out, Blizzard is gradually becoming more open with their fans and actively respond to their criticism. In my opinion Year of the Dragon was the time when their approach started changing and as much I loved Hearthstone "back in the days", noone can't deny that for the first few years the game was treated by the developers as a side project to WoW. I remember that about 2 year's ago (Shudder meta) I myself was often critisising Blizzard, as they were clearly deserving of it. However, now with them actively improving, I can't stand people, who only whine, because something is not the way they want it to be.
Yeah I can see where you're coming from blizzard were the complete opposite when the game was first released, I think it took them like 2 expansions to nerf undertaker (should have been nerfed long before it was). They've improved a lot since then - I just hope they don't go full 180 and start changing everything the community wants because if they start adhering to fan service the game takes a huge nose dive (just like how everything associated with fan service does).
One other thing I guess I didn't consider is that there has been a whole new generation of people since the game was released and people on the internet are just more self entitled and toxic in general these days. I blame it on social media and the counter culture movements which are forever ongoing. If you've been on twitter over the past couple of year you'll know what I mean. Most people see themselves as intellectually superior to everyone else, its petty. That wasn't the way I was raised and I'm damn proud of that fact. It's scary to think how warped the minds the youth of today can be because of the internet but that's an entirely different topic for an entirely different day!
You surely don't see yourself as intellectually superior with posts like that
I think Tickatus winratio statistics is not proper data to decide if it balnaced or not.
I propose the assumption, that card game is great, when the variance of decks actually played is very high. Unfortunatelly, I have no idea how to measure variance of decks played, except tryig to play the game for 2 hours.
Tickatus decrease the variance of decks played, because so many control decks has no chance vs it. People just stop playing decks, which has no chance vs tickatus, so you are not seeing it in winatio statistics how OP tickatus is.
In case of anything, I like hearthstone. Complaining is good, because it helps developers to focus ont he right target. I hope blizzard hire people who read game forums and give developers feedback in kind way, so they are not sad due to all negative bullshit on forums.
I didn't want to turn this thread into a tickatus debate lol but you have made a good point and I want to address. Tickatus definitely keeps some other control decks out of the game (to a certain extent) but that doesn't make it OP in itself and let me explain why, because this also leads directly into one of my main points and its simple - just because someone wants to play control warrior/preist or whatever doesn't mean it has to be able to beat warlock, other control decks can still be viable because of other matchups. There is always going to be a control deck that is the strongest control deck, same for aggro and tempo. Its like you cant have it all ways, every matchup cant be 50/50 because then the whole concept of the game ceases to exist. Baring in mind we still don't know what is the strongest control deck yet.
The fact of the matter is - Tickatus is just an annoying card, it sucks getting your cards burned. But it also sucks when you cant clear a watch post or when miracle priest generates a bunch of cards or when your whole board dies to brawl or any other number of cards that can be annoying.
I think its almost a pointless debate at this stage because no matter how much people complain blizzard aren't going to nerf tickatus, I'd like to think he would have been hit with the recent if he was gonna be nerfed. The stats would indicate that it isn't OP and the devs should be basing all their nerfs/buffs directly from in game stats.
Having an "unfavourable" matchup is a thing. Having an "unwinnable" one is another, entirely. The only chance for many control/combo decks out there is Tickatus sitting at the bottom of the opponent's deck. And we all know warlock has access to some nice tutoring, right?
Even in a bubble like Hearthpwn you have a subbubble of whiners about whiners.
But let me responds to the pseudo-intellectuals, bandwagon and fellow-traveller types on this forum thinking that staging mandarism towards Blizzards wacky and unbalanced card design somehow rubbes off importance, i.e. that if you ride along with developers and defend their card design choices will give you the right to assume everyone else not concurring is eighter dumb, stupid and doesn't understand the game.
Those types came and when over the years. I can virually write a book on commentators in this forum thinking that aligning with developers give them the right of bully and arrogance.
Card design is extremely political. The are two groups in the HS-community. Blizzards target audience and everybody else. The target audience is served. Others are just wallpaper.
There are 3 winconditions discernable regardless of expansions: a. Burn, burn,burn. b. spam-buff-go face and c. OTK. It is euphemistically called faced paced. Those wincons serve the target audience. If that crowd gets mad they nerve. All others may suffer.. and those start complaining here.
The card to curb the others is the extremely political card Tickatus. It is a control killer, well subservient to the target audience. The sole reason why Tic wasn't nerved. The same goes for Deck of Lunacy. Nerfed but still playable.
Ever wonder why a class like Priest never consistently is and was a Tier one? Yes dragon Priest is well known. Because Priest is not an target audience class. Imagine Priest to be consistently oppressive as Paladin, Mage, Hunter, Rogue.....all hell would break loose.
The problem of Hearthstone is the problem of its developers. The non-target audience community are the second class citizens in the Hearthstone realm. And they feel it. It raises much contempt and complain. The lack of balance, the lack of wincon diversity, too steep RPS are all condusive to a mindless aggressive gameplay of the target audience. But the worst are those who defend developers on fora like these no matter what. Those have my deepest contempt.
All you said was: "I dont think homicde is a problem, because it doesnt happen all the time and especially not to me. People just should stop whining when someone they know got murdered."
Tickatus is the worst card ever because it locks out all other control decks. I will never relent. It has made me like the entire game far less than I would. I have never ever wanted a nerf more than to Tickatus of any game, any CCG, ever. I absolutely loathe the card and wish they just moved it to Wild or make it 9 mana or destroy their own cards. Anything.
I don't know what makes you think you'd win against jaraxxus with any control deck but you're free to dabble in your incorrect fantasies I guess.
And honestly, what would "control" win against? Take away tickatus from warlocks for the sake of argument, priests can't do jacksquat against 2 mana 6/6 for multiple turns. Warriors can't do anything either. Are there other """control""" decks in the game? And what makes you think those control decks wouldn't still lose to DoL mage, which can still high roll, but takes longer to do so? That is a problem against more proactive decks to be certain, but priests snoring their lifetimes away? Not so much. Or against clown druids or any other deck with massive amounts of value and threats.
When your gameplan is sitting on your hands answering stuff and your wincon is boring your opponent to death you can have a positive wr% if 60% of the meta is hyper aggro with no way to refill...and current aggro decks have no issues with running out of resources.
I unironically can't wait until team 5 nerfs tickatus so warlocks will finally put good cards in their decks and then everyone will be like omg why can't I win against control warlocks, this is tOtAlLy uNfAiR hOw cAn tHiS bE.
I feel like this thread has derailed a bit. There is a Tickatus thread for everyone that wants to discuss it.
As for the community, it does seem a bit whiney and a bit entitled, but that just seems like par for the course these days.
Lots of people have had a taste of "justice" they received by complaining, protesting and whining. Whether it was actually justified or not. And they will continue to do it. It's like a toddler crying because you took away the piece of candy they found on the ground outside. If you cave and give it back, you're not helping them develop understanding of what's okay and what's not okay. And now they know crying lets them get their way.
I guess at some point we need to draw the line to define which issues are actually issues that need addressing, and which issues just make some people a little bit less happy.
But realistically, how can one game possibly make it's entire audience happy with it 100% of the time? Especially in a competitive setting, where someone has to win and someone has to lose.
Someone has to win, the other lose. But let that happen in a decent way, a balanced way with respect for skill as the main reason of winning or losing. Not through favouritism.
I think Tickatus winratio statistics is not proper data to decide if it balnaced or not.
I propose the assumption, that card game is great, when the variance of decks actually played is very high. Unfortunatelly, I have no idea how to measure variance of decks played, except tryig to play the game for 2 hours.
Tickatus decrease the variance of decks played, because so many control decks has no chance vs it. People just stop playing decks, which has no chance vs tickatus, so you are not seeing it in winatio statistics how OP tickatus is.
In case of anything, I like hearthstone. Complaining is good, because it helps developers to focus ont he right target. I hope blizzard hire people who read game forums and give developers feedback in kind way, so they are not sad due to all negative bullshit on forums.
I didn't want to turn this thread into a tickatus debate lol but you have made a good point and I want to address. Tickatus definitely keeps some other control decks out of the game (to a certain extent) but that doesn't make it OP in itself and let me explain why, because this also leads directly into one of my main points and its simple - just because someone wants to play control warrior/preist or whatever doesn't mean it has to be able to beat warlock, other control decks can still be viable because of other matchups. There is always going to be a control deck that is the strongest control deck, same for aggro and tempo. Its like you cant have it all ways, every matchup cant be 50/50 because then the whole concept of the game ceases to exist. Baring in mind we still don't know what is the strongest control deck yet.
The fact of the matter is - Tickatus is just an annoying card, it sucks getting your cards burned. But it also sucks when you cant clear a watch post or when miracle priest generates a bunch of cards or when your whole board dies to brawl or any other number of cards that can be annoying.
I think its almost a pointless debate at this stage because no matter how much people complain blizzard aren't going to nerf tickatus, I'd like to think he would have been hit with the recent if he was gonna be nerfed. The stats would indicate that it isn't OP and the devs should be basing all their nerfs/buffs directly from in game stats.
Having an "unfavourable" matchup is a thing. Having an "unwinnable" one is another, entirely. The only chance for many control/combo decks out there is Tickatus sitting at the bottom of the opponent's deck. And we all know warlock has access to some nice tutoring, right?
Thats the point of the card, its there to counter combo decks. Control decks have no way of dealing with combo decks who just greed turn after turn until they get their combo and then win in one turn, that's equally as annoying as getting your cards burned imo. Tickatus gives you the option to disrupt that style of play, it doesn't make the game 'unwinnable' that's absurd. I just don't understand your side of the argument because one deck cant be good against all deck archetypes and you aren't going to run in to only warlock
Take any meta from the past and look at the control decks - one of them is better than the rest of them. Same for aggro, same for tempo and same for midrange. There have been times when control warrior has been at the top of the meta, even control priest has topped the meta before (not very often granted but it has happened).
And like someone else has already stated it isn't even tickatus what gives warlock the edge against other control decks, its Lord J-raxx. If tick gets nerfed are people then gonna start crying about Lord J? And then if he gets nerfed, is everyone gonna start complaining that priest is too strong?
What about other cards that disrupt play style? I was playing poison rogue last night and I got oozed and lost the game because of it - I didn't make a thread "nErF oOzE iTs tOo sTrOnG" - I accepted the fact that they had a card that countered my deck and I lost because of that. Its the same principle.
Of the 100s of nerf tickatus threads I've seen to date - I've yet to see a reasonable argument that proves the card is OP. Its simply a case of "I don't like the card and I think its unfair so I want it nerfed because that would improve MY experience". Which to me is fine, you don't have to like the card but at that the same time you aren't presenting any evidence that the card is OP - so you cant be shocked that it hasn't been nerfed. (I don't think it will get nerfed tbh, I think the devs may hold firm on this one and if any card gets nerfed in warlock it will be j-raxx).
I agree with most of what you said. I have always been annoyed with people, who can't be grateful for anything. As has already been pointed out, Blizzard is gradually becoming more open with their fans and actively respond to their criticism. In my opinion Year of the Dragon was the time when their approach started changing and as much I loved Hearthstone "back in the days", noone can't deny that for the first few years the game was treated by the developers as a side project to WoW. I remember that about 2 year's ago (Shudder meta) I myself was often critisising Blizzard, as they were clearly deserving of it. However, now with them actively improving, I can't stand people, who only whine, because something is not the way they want it to be.
Yeah I can see where you're coming from blizzard were the complete opposite when the game was first released, I think it took them like 2 expansions to nerf undertaker (should have been nerfed long before it was). They've improved a lot since then - I just hope they don't go full 180 and start changing everything the community wants because if they start adhering to fan service the game takes a huge nose dive (just like how everything associated with fan service does).
One other thing I guess I didn't consider is that there has been a whole new generation of people since the game was released and people on the internet are just more self entitled and toxic in general these days. I blame it on social media and the counter culture movements which are forever ongoing. If you've been on twitter over the past couple of year you'll know what I mean. Most people see themselves as intellectually superior to everyone else, its petty. That wasn't the way I was raised and I'm damn proud of that fact. It's scary to think how warped the minds the youth of today can be because of the internet but that's an entirely different topic for an entirely different day!
I remember twitter shortly after it launched, I used to actually really enjoy it and ended up with a lot of people I'd keep regular contact with etc. Once it got 'popular' though, it became a toxic dump and I've not actively used it for years now.
I'd say in the last couple of years I've more and more reduced the use of anything online because it's almost always such a negative, depressing experience. I now have two sites I'll have a look at with any regularity and one sub reddit for fallout because the fallout 76 community is actually pretty chill, I've enjoyed my time over there. I haven't logged into Facebook or twitter for years, don't miss it in the slightest.
I feel like this thread has derailed a bit. There is a Tickatus thread for everyone that wants to discuss it.
As for the community, it does seem a bit whiney and a bit entitled, but that just seems like par for the course these days.
Lots of people have had a taste of "justice" they received by complaining, protesting and whining. Whether it was actually justified or not. And they will continue to do it. It's like a toddler crying because you took away the piece of candy they found on the ground outside. If you cave and give it back, you're not helping them develop understanding of what's okay and what's not okay. And now they know crying lets them get their way.
I guess at some point we need to draw the line to define which issues are actually issues that need addressing, and which issues just make some people a little bit less happy.
But realistically, how can one game possibly make it's entire audience happy with it 100% of the time? Especially in a competitive setting, where someone has to win and someone has to lose.
Couldn't agree more - you please one person and that upsets the next, there needs to be healthy balance and I think right now (imo) that the game isn't too far away from that right now - the devs are listening to feedback and at least trying to implement changes to keep the general audience happy but people are always going to try and push boundaries.
I think the fact that someone has to lose is lost on a lot of folks and they won't be happy until they can win every game on skill alone - which is never gonna happen.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Its not about what annoys me personally though because its not all about me and that's the whole point! Its more about the direction the game is heading as a result of the way the community behaves rather than my personal grievances. People on the internet are always going to be whiny and toxic just because that's how the internet is. The core community of HS for the most part were never like that, that I can recall at least. At the very least we could all pull together in the past for a common cause, these days we can hardly even agree on a common cause let alone pull together as a community. Maybe it was always like that and I'm completely wrong and just didn't notice because blizzard didn't pay them enough attention.
People are just missing the point here - perhaps I could have worded things better. But in a nutshell, people complain not to make the game better but to make their own experience better and do it in a manner where they are unwilling to concede their point regardless of what argument someone throws at them.
And as expected the response to this thread just further proves this point - some of the replies and just people making sly jabs at myself and offering no real substance to their response. I appreciate the people who have taken the time to actually write something of substance and offer their opinion, whether they agree with me or not, I respect them all the same.
At the end of the day the only thing I want to see is HS in the best position it can be and not a game dictated entirely by the community. Blizzard are starting to concede with a lot of the demands lately and it just makes the situation worse.
And I'll say it one final time - I'm not against whining (this post is entirely me whining about something). I'm just disappointed with the way the community is right now, there's too much self entitlement. And if people cant determine the distinction between those two statements, feel free to post a jab, I won't take offence. Otherwise, if you disagree with what I've said and actually have something interesting to say in response then please post it because I'm always open to the other side of the argument, I have no problem whatsoever admitting when I'm wrong.
I thought with my post being short it wouldn’t have been misconstrued but I should have known better.
I didn’t love the first few expansion but they largely followed the foundations laid down by the original game. In recent years the design team have tossed that completely out of the window. Card draw and card generation now doesn’t even have to have a cost, absurd amounts of mana can be cheated out by most of the roster, stats can be piled onto the board faster and earlier, competitive RNG is a constant factor. The game’s direction has changed massively, imo for the worst.
I can get where you're coming from. From a personal stand point, I disagree, I've gradually gotten more and more engaged with the game over the last few years and it's now at a point where I play it consistently in some form, for most of the year. Previously I'd find myself breaking for 2/3/4 months at a time because I had gotten bored. I can't say the game is objectively better, just that from my perspective, I've found a lot of the cards and things you can do a lot more fun than previously. I also feel like there are way more viable decks and archetypes now. I coukd be wrong on that but when I started playing, it seemed like everyone pretty much played one of the top few classes and I saw a lot of the same decks. I do see a good variety now and have played different archetypes with most classes within one expansion cycle.
Welcome to the internet these days... I know it's sad but it's true!
" In the beginning, there was nothing, which exploded."
I agree with most of what you said. I have always been annoyed with people, who can't be grateful for anything. As has already been pointed out, Blizzard is gradually becoming more open with their fans and actively respond to their criticism. In my opinion Year of the Dragon was the time when their approach started changing and as much I loved Hearthstone "back in the days", noone can't deny that for the first few years the game was treated by the developers as a side project to WoW. I remember that about 2 year's ago (Shudder meta) I myself was often critisising Blizzard, as they were clearly deserving of it. However, now with them actively improving, I can't stand people, who only whine, because something is not the way they want it to be.
A lot of really cool things have been added, Classic HS looks very vanilla nowadays even though I prefer the pacing of the games. I can see why the modern game appeals to people. It’s a lot faster, crazier, and far more reliant on huge swing turns and big plays.
I don’t want to trash the current design team, a lot of what they do is very positive. I just wish they would show a bit of restraint with the power level of their cards.
You miss the point where people are not complaining about Tickatus power level, they are complaining about its wrong design.
If Tickatus and Deck of lunacy 2 mana had 10% winrate and they were the worst decks in the game to climb, the issue still persist.
Winrate or power level are irrelevant to the argument
It seems like they realise this themselves to be fair. Someone else mentioned in the AMAs they've openly said they've messed up on certain things or got power levels wrong etc which I think is fair enough. I recall it being mentioned that if there is enough clamour for nax to be added to classic then that's something they could be open to and maybe hearthstone classic will develop into something more appealing for people wanting a bit of time with less crazy stuff.
It seems to me that they are wanting to develop more and more rather than scale back and wind down. Hearthstone seems to be developing into a platform you can go and just play strategy games. Some will stick to one or two of those, others like myself will find something in most content so I'll probably flit about the different modes but predominantly stick with standard.
I sympathise with them to a degree because after you've developed over a thousand or two thousand cards, it must be a really rough balance to keep things fresh and interesting, in reaidng power levels and crazy effects seems like the obvious starting point. I saw a lot of people say barren looks boring etc and so if they look to reduce the power, it's boring, if they don't, it's busted. Feels like they are caught between a rock and a hard place at times.
I do get why people would dislike high power level cards. It's just personal taste that I like them. I like having choices and decisions to make, if a deck can play out differently in most games then that's probably something I'll play a lot of. I already miss the mage quest we lost with this rotation. As much as it wasn't a competitive card, I loved being able to effectively lucky dip every turn and potentially find answers to problems I otherwise wouldn't be able to.
Yeah I can see where you're coming from blizzard were the complete opposite when the game was first released, I think it took them like 2 expansions to nerf undertaker (should have been nerfed long before it was). They've improved a lot since then - I just hope they don't go full 180 and start changing everything the community wants because if they start adhering to fan service the game takes a huge nose dive (just like how everything associated with fan service does).
One other thing I guess I didn't consider is that there has been a whole new generation of people since the game was released and people on the internet are just more self entitled and toxic in general these days. I blame it on social media and the counter culture movements which are forever ongoing. If you've been on twitter over the past couple of year you'll know what I mean. Most people see themselves as intellectually superior to everyone else, its petty. That wasn't the way I was raised and I'm damn proud of that fact. It's scary to think how warped the minds the youth of today can be because of the internet but that's an entirely different topic for an entirely different day!
Tickatus is the worst card ever because it locks out all other control decks. I will never relent. It has made me like the entire game far less than I would. I have never ever wanted a nerf more than to Tickatus of any game, any CCG, ever. I absolutely loathe the card and wish they just moved it to Wild or make it 9 mana or destroy their own cards. Anything.
You surely don't see yourself as intellectually superior with posts like that
Having an "unfavourable" matchup is a thing. Having an "unwinnable" one is another, entirely. The only chance for many control/combo decks out there is Tickatus sitting at the bottom of the opponent's deck. And we all know warlock has access to some nice tutoring, right?
Even in a bubble like Hearthpwn you have a subbubble of whiners about whiners.
But let me responds to the pseudo-intellectuals, bandwagon and fellow-traveller types on this forum thinking that staging mandarism towards Blizzards wacky and unbalanced card design somehow rubbes off importance, i.e. that if you ride along with developers and defend their card design choices will give you the right to assume everyone else not concurring is eighter dumb, stupid and doesn't understand the game.
Those types came and when over the years. I can virually write a book on commentators in this forum thinking that aligning with developers give them the right of bully and arrogance.
The problem of Hearthstone is the problem of its developers. The non-target audience community are the second class citizens in the Hearthstone realm. And they feel it. It raises much contempt and complain. The lack of balance, the lack of wincon diversity, too steep RPS are all condusive to a mindless aggressive gameplay of the target audience. But the worst are those who defend developers on fora like these no matter what. Those have my deepest contempt.
We make our world significant through the courage of our questions and the depth of our answers.
All you said was: "I dont think homicde is a problem, because it doesnt happen all the time and especially not to me. People just should stop whining when someone they know got murdered."
I don't know what makes you think you'd win against jaraxxus with any control deck but you're free to dabble in your incorrect fantasies I guess.
And honestly, what would "control" win against? Take away tickatus from warlocks for the sake of argument, priests can't do jacksquat against 2 mana 6/6 for multiple turns. Warriors can't do anything either. Are there other """control""" decks in the game? And what makes you think those control decks wouldn't still lose to DoL mage, which can still high roll, but takes longer to do so? That is a problem against more proactive decks to be certain, but priests snoring their lifetimes away? Not so much. Or against clown druids or any other deck with massive amounts of value and threats.
When your gameplan is sitting on your hands answering stuff and your wincon is boring your opponent to death you can have a positive wr% if 60% of the meta is hyper aggro with no way to refill...and current aggro decks have no issues with running out of resources.
I unironically can't wait until team 5 nerfs tickatus so warlocks will finally put good cards in their decks and then everyone will be like omg why can't I win against control warlocks, this is tOtAlLy uNfAiR hOw cAn tHiS bE.
I feel like this thread has derailed a bit. There is a Tickatus thread for everyone that wants to discuss it.
As for the community, it does seem a bit whiney and a bit entitled, but that just seems like par for the course these days.
Lots of people have had a taste of "justice" they received by complaining, protesting and whining. Whether it was actually justified or not. And they will continue to do it. It's like a toddler crying because you took away the piece of candy they found on the ground outside. If you cave and give it back, you're not helping them develop understanding of what's okay and what's not okay. And now they know crying lets them get their way.
I guess at some point we need to draw the line to define which issues are actually issues that need addressing, and which issues just make some people a little bit less happy.
But realistically, how can one game possibly make it's entire audience happy with it 100% of the time? Especially in a competitive setting, where someone has to win and someone has to lose.
Someone has to win, the other lose. But let that happen in a decent way, a balanced way with respect for skill as the main reason of winning or losing. Not through favouritism.
We make our world significant through the courage of our questions and the depth of our answers.
Thats the point of the card, its there to counter combo decks. Control decks have no way of dealing with combo decks who just greed turn after turn until they get their combo and then win in one turn, that's equally as annoying as getting your cards burned imo. Tickatus gives you the option to disrupt that style of play, it doesn't make the game 'unwinnable' that's absurd. I just don't understand your side of the argument because one deck cant be good against all deck archetypes and you aren't going to run in to only warlock
Take any meta from the past and look at the control decks - one of them is better than the rest of them. Same for aggro, same for tempo and same for midrange. There have been times when control warrior has been at the top of the meta, even control priest has topped the meta before (not very often granted but it has happened).
And like someone else has already stated it isn't even tickatus what gives warlock the edge against other control decks, its Lord J-raxx. If tick gets nerfed are people then gonna start crying about Lord J? And then if he gets nerfed, is everyone gonna start complaining that priest is too strong?
What about other cards that disrupt play style? I was playing poison rogue last night and I got oozed and lost the game because of it - I didn't make a thread "nErF oOzE iTs tOo sTrOnG" - I accepted the fact that they had a card that countered my deck and I lost because of that. Its the same principle.
Of the 100s of nerf tickatus threads I've seen to date - I've yet to see a reasonable argument that proves the card is OP. Its simply a case of "I don't like the card and I think its unfair so I want it nerfed because that would improve MY experience". Which to me is fine, you don't have to like the card but at that the same time you aren't presenting any evidence that the card is OP - so you cant be shocked that it hasn't been nerfed. (I don't think it will get nerfed tbh, I think the devs may hold firm on this one and if any card gets nerfed in warlock it will be j-raxx).
I remember twitter shortly after it launched, I used to actually really enjoy it and ended up with a lot of people I'd keep regular contact with etc. Once it got 'popular' though, it became a toxic dump and I've not actively used it for years now.
I'd say in the last couple of years I've more and more reduced the use of anything online because it's almost always such a negative, depressing experience. I now have two sites I'll have a look at with any regularity and one sub reddit for fallout because the fallout 76 community is actually pretty chill, I've enjoyed my time over there. I haven't logged into Facebook or twitter for years, don't miss it in the slightest.
Couldn't agree more - you please one person and that upsets the next, there needs to be healthy balance and I think right now (imo) that the game isn't too far away from that right now - the devs are listening to feedback and at least trying to implement changes to keep the general audience happy but people are always going to try and push boundaries.
I think the fact that someone has to lose is lost on a lot of folks and they won't be happy until they can win every game on skill alone - which is never gonna happen.