Hearthpwn

Just wanted to share my F2P experience after its first foray into free-to-play effort.

So after having opened 90 packs, 3000+ gold on day-one of Barrens release in addition to the 59.5 packs purchased/(unlocked via rewards track)--I got 3 legendaries.  The first was within the proverbial "first ten packs," the second was around 50-ish, and the third on pack 78 (meaning, I went 67 packs netting a single legendary (give-or-take, since I can't recall which pack within the first ten delivered the first).

I'd say that's pretty lousy, if somebody asked.  3 legendaries inside of nearly 100 packs is pretty deflating...I know the game doesn't depend on them but deck archetypes do so that means some real monotonous game play.

I can't think of another way to give the finger without actually lifting a finger right now--so thanks, Blizzard!  Really took the joy out of playing this expansion.

That's all--dismissed!

Hope others aren't as miserly and their luck is far better than mine.

Cheers and happy gaming!

https://pitytracker.com/

After the 1st 10, there's roughly a 3% chance of getting a legendary in any given pack from that set, slightly increasing with each opened pack you don't get one, up to a guaranteed drop on the 40th pack, with the chance resetting after you get one. You can use the above site to check your own personal odds and progress.

Hey, thank you so much for the explanation !

SHAREit MX Player

I get what you're saying but I really never understand the point of complaining about the value one receives for something they dont financially contribute to.

An argument regarding the value one receives on a per dollar spent basis is something we can talk about but I'm sorry, you can't be ripped off if you've lost nothing.

Right now, Hearthstone is at its best when it comes to F2P players. I started playing on a new account 2 months ago. I have a few competitive decks elemental shaman, face hunter, N'zoth priest, token druid and some random frenzy warrior deck. I also got to legend for the first time in 6 years of playing after disenchanting my collection on 4-5 accounts because of dumb tilting  when I was younger.

If you want more premium cards, you can get your credit card to do the work. Otherwise, I think the game delivers just enough resources to play fun and creative decks. ( I climbed from diamond 5 to diamond 1 with a home brewed frenzy warrior, I have the deck list on my account if anyone wants to give it a go)

I hear you--you're not wrong!  I even agree with some of your points.

I used to pay for the bundle packs and the legendary return rate was so much better.  It's mostly anecdotal at the moment because I have only one "F2P" expansion of experience.

It was mostly just a #feelsbadman post but going 67 packs with 1 legendary is really terrible--that's an awful rate.  I'm pretty much done with buying Barrens and having only gotten 3 legendaries plus the 2 from the rewards track sucks because there are quite a few decks I'd really like to play but can't without doubling down but I'm saving for the next expansion at this point.  Even the alleged 1/5 packs for epics is soooo far from what I experienced.

I guess I am pretty lucky with my packs and quite successful in Arena since my return when the rewards track launched, but I am only missing 7 legs and 9 epics from the current set as f2p. I can also play every standard deck except for clown druid and rush/control warrior. Another 5k dust and I could even craft them if I wanted. But I remember a time where I opened 1/40 followed by 1/39 and that was extremely frustrating.

I think that the leg pity timer should be reduced to 1 in 30 and the average to 1 in 15, but Blizzard wants to make that sweet money. If you opened 67 packs, chances are that you got a lot of dust. Do you recall how much dust you got from destroying cards you had more than 2 copies of? I would assume that this should be enough for roughly 2 more legs given that these were new set packs. You also got a full set of commons and rares from the new set on day one, so you could try to see the good side of things. It's still not great, but you spent no money on it and can't expect too much as a consequence. As much as I would like to say that Blizzard is greedy, card games in general are expensive.

For the record, 1/5 is an average for epics that was mentioned by Blizzard (whatever that means). The pity timer for epics should be 1/10.

It‘s definately luck-dependent. I‘m a f2p since Naxx and i experienced both sites. In TGT for example i got 2 legendaries out of the 1st 60 or 70 packs (when there was no leg in the first 10 rule). And the last two expansions i got one in every 18th pack if i calculated it correctly. So right now i‘ve got a quite good collection for just a f2p

Quote from D_Lord >>

I guess I am pretty lucky with my packs and quite successful in Arena since my return when the rewards track launched, but I am only missing 7 legs and 9 epics from the current set as f2p. I can also play every standard deck except for clown druid and rush/control warrior. Another 5k dust and I could even craft them if I wanted. But I remember a time where I opened 1/40 followed by 1/39 and that was extremely frustrating.

I think that the leg pity timer should be reduced to 1 in 30 and the average to 1 in 15, but Blizzard wants to make that sweet money. If you opened 67 packs, chances are that you got a lot of dust. Do you recall how much dust you got from destroying cards you had more than 2 copies of? I would assume that this should be enough for roughly 2 more legs given that these were new set packs. You also got a full set of commons and rares from the new set on day one, so you could try to see the good side of things. It's still not great, but you spent no money on it and can't expect too much as a consequence. As much as I would like to say that Blizzard is greedy, card games in general are expensive.

For the record, 1/5 is an average for epics that was mentioned by Blizzard (whatever that means). The pity timer for epics should be 1/10.

 Agree on the suggestions for droprates. I think those would be fair numbers.

To put things in perspective: The number of legendaries per set increased quite a bit over the years. Before Un'goro it was around 21, I think. In Un'goro, they established 23, then went up to 25 with Demon Hunter, and now 29 with the mini-sets, where you can get the extra 4 guaranteed, but only for a limited time.

The quality of legendaries increased significantly as well. Older sets (GVG, TGT, MSG) rarely had more than 4 or 5 good legendaries, while newer sets frequently have 5-10 and more. Scholomance was so insane that almost all of them were good at some point, some of them to this day, and quite a few were nerfed.  

In the meantime, Blizzard has substantially increased their efforts to sell cosmetics. Not sure how much they make with cosmetics now, or in comparison with packs, but maybe they are less dependent on big pack spendings by now. Not that it really matters, because with these suggested changes, people who want to get a full collection would still need to spend a lot, as would players who like golden cards. A better droprate wouldn't mean that you can get 20 legendaries within 100 packs, but maybe 7 instead of 5.

As for all the money-talk: I remember the heated debate here because someone suggested that Classic should be free. Lots of people said that it's never gonna happen, not even possible for financial reasons, and some blabla about "greedy F2P leeches". And here we are with the Core Set, completely free for everyone, legendaries included. Just because the developers thought it would make the game better.

I think a better droprate for legendaries is adequate, would make the game more enjoyable, and I could imagine that at least some devs would agree.

Quote from HatShapedHat >>

I get what you're saying but I really never understand the point of complaining about the value one receives for something they dont financially contribute to.

An argument regarding the value one receives on a per dollar spent basis is something we can talk about but I'm sorry, you can't be ripped off if you've lost nothing.

 

Dumb comment. You cannot attack f2p players for choosing not to spend money. They contribute with their time, mouth to mouth advertisement, and in matchmaking to usually lose against players with full sets. He is not wrong, the game is darn expensive, and it's probably impossible for a f2p player to keep up with 10 classes.

Quote from HatShapedHat >>

I get what you're saying but I really never understand the point of complaining about the value one receives for something they dont financially contribute to.

An argument regarding the value one receives on a per dollar spent basis is something we can talk about but I'm sorry, you can't be ripped off if you've lost nothing.

 

 Yeah, I used to be compassionate  towards f2p’ers, but over time too many of them have shown to be literally nothing more than choosing beggars, so now I just find them cringy. Edit: The ones that complain.

The notion of “LOL bad game is P2Win” is just about the dumbest thing I can imagine.

Gues what? The people who pay are the ones who keep the game in existence. If every single person went F2P, they’d shut it down in a heartbeat. 

There are only three models you can have. 

1. You can either have a game that’s free at it’s base, with ways to slowly progress for free, and the option to pay to hasten this progression. 

2. You can have a game with a big up front cost, and unlock all of the existing content. (This method is not realistic for tcg’s/ccg’s).

3. You can have a game with a monthly sub. 

Quote from Andrei2007 >>

Quote from HatShapedHat >>

I get what you're saying but I really never understand the point of complaining about the value one receives for something they dont financially contribute to.

An argument regarding the value one receives on a per dollar spent basis is something we can talk about but I'm sorry, you can't be ripped off if you've lost nothing.

 

Dumb comment. You cannot attack f2p players for choosing not to spend money. They contribute with their time, mouth to mouth advertisement, and in matchmaking to usually lose against players with full sets. He is not wrong, the game is darn expensive, and it's probably impossible for a f2p player to keep up with 10 classes.

 You can absolutely attack the F2P choosing beggars IF they constantly complain. You think someone who is complaining all the time is “spreading the good word” about the game lol?

I can totally appreciate the reasonable F2P’ers that understand that if they wish to remain F2P, their progression is going to be slower than someone who spends money. How isn’t this right or fair? People who spend money on the game keep it alive. 

And before you fall back on the “it’s too expensive” argument. It’s a card game. Card games are expensive by default because they have rotating expansions. This is a simple matter of “know what you’re getting into” and nothing more. 

And before the “but other card games do it for cheaper” whatever argument comes about, then go play those. 

Quote from Andrei2007 >>

Quote from HatShapedHat >>

I get what you're saying but I really never understand the point of complaining about the value one receives for something they dont financially contribute to.

An argument regarding the value one receives on a per dollar spent basis is something we can talk about but I'm sorry, you can't be ripped off if you've lost nothing.

 

Dumb comment. You cannot attack f2p players for choosing not to spend money. They contribute with their time, mouth to mouth advertisement, and in matchmaking to usually lose against players with full sets. He is not wrong, the game is darn expensive, and it's probably impossible for a f2p player to keep up with 10 classes.

 I can tell you that we f2p players do not usually lose to players with full sets because they have more cards. We usually have the same decks and often more experience with them because we couldn't pay much dust to build many other decks, so if we lose, it's because we are worse players than our non-f2p opponents. The game is definitely not pay 2 win and you don't suddenly win because you have more % of a full collection.

Before we end up in a f2p players vs. playing players discussion, I think we can all agree that it would be nicer for both types of players to have slightly less punishing pity timers and averages for opening legendaries. In the end, paying players also benefit from lower pity timers. And that is basically what OP complains about.

Complaining about f2ps or paying players is completely pointless. Both will exist and both will be important for the future of the game. If you can't understand why, you are just being ignorant.

HS isn't cheap, even for a card game, but there are many freemium games out there that are a lot worse.

Quote from Andrei2007 >>

Quote from HatShapedHat >>

I get what you're saying but I really never understand the point of complaining about the value one receives for something they dont financially contribute to.

An argument regarding the value one receives on a per dollar spent basis is something we can talk about but I'm sorry, you can't be ripped off if you've lost nothing.

 

Dumb comment. You cannot attack f2p players for choosing not to spend money. They contribute with their time, mouth to mouth advertisement, and in matchmaking to usually lose against players with full sets. He is not wrong, the game is darn expensive, and it's probably impossible for a f2p player to keep up with 10 classes.

 I mean I agree the game is too expensive, however F2P players who have no intention of putting money into the game are completely unaffected by how much it costs. For anyone willing to put the time in they can get a lot of Hearthstone for completely free. It does require a large time commitment though.

The issue with HS’s economy is that your choice is either to play the game an absurd amount of hours per week OR become a whale. If any F2P players grievance is that they are willing to pay a little but there are just no reasonable options for improving their collection for a fair price then I would completely agree.

For situations like this I did a f2p experiment. Link is in my signature.

At the end of the legend run I still had plenty of dust left. And that considering I didn't play wild, which would be easier.

Tldr; New players are rewarded plenty. All you need is to learn the meta and you'll perform fine even with a limited budget.

Your title is inappropriate.

On a casual level, yes, f2p players have the possibility of reaching legend. But if they want to go competitive? Not really. Classes rotate in power levels, so just having a few classes you collect for means there will be seasons in which you cannot compete in open cups. You also cannot experiment with all top meta decks to understand how to play them, or play against them. On top of that, you need a subscription to hsreplay premium to understand the meta, winrates and mulligans. So yeah, don't tell me that having to sink endless hours in arena runs just so you can play standard without getting mopped is right. Also, saying that all card games are expensive and "you know what you get yourself into" is a poor argument, it does not make it right to pay the value of 2 triple a games every 4 months to keep up with the meta. There are other games that do not punish you for not paying. And yes, every voice counts, be it from a f2p player or the fattest whale in the ocean. By using their service and contributing to the player pool, everyone has the right to criticize it. Don't tell people they cannot complain just because you spent more than them.

Anybody who plays the game competitively should be playing the game more than enough to not be spending anything. Even without playing arena.

 "dumb comment" - Great opening statement there.  Nothing reels someone in and grabs their attention for a lively discussion like a subjective insult

"you cannot attack f2p players" - Another wonderful comment - it really shows you read what I wrote, took it at face value and in no way created your own narrative /s.  A small piece of advise you can take to heart and apply to almost everything in life...just because someone says something you don't personally agree with does not mean they are "attacking" you.

"contribute with their time" - If Blizz isn't making money, why would they care?

"mouth to mouth advertisement" - Personally for me, I always like when someone talks directly into my mouth when telling me something.  I used to prefer someone speaking in the direction of my ears which allowed me to hear what they were saying but 'mouth to mouth' speaking just can't be beat.  (PS, the phrase you were looking for was "word of mouth")

"matchmaking to usually lose against players with full sets" - A 100% completely unfounded hyperbolic statement backed up by absolutely nothing; but hey! it's 2021 so this might as well qualify for headline news.  Let's pretend for a moment the argument is valid (it's not in case you were wondering or wanted to explore this any further), you are saying a main reason Blizzard employs a sizeable F2P player base is to act as cannon fodder for their paid clients?  I (and many, many others) are going to simply disagree.

Quote from Dapptastic_ >>

Just wanted to share my F2P experience after its first foray into free-to-play effort.

I'd say that's pretty lousy, if somebody asked.  3 legendaries inside of nearly 100 packs is pretty deflating...I know the game doesn't depend on them but deck archetypes do so that means some real monotonous game play.

 I can't think of another way to give the finger without actually lifting a finger right now--so thanks, Blizzard!  Really took the joy out of playing this expansion.

 Hey, I'm going to let you in on a little secret. Blizzard does not want f2p players to have fun. Blizzard wants f2p players to **almost** have fun. They want you to try the game and see how much fun it could be if you actually spent money.

So if that's the experience you're having, everything is working exactly as intended. Don't expect anything to change. Complaining is not going to help, because your complaints only confirm that their strategy is perfect.