⚙
Learn More
Cosmetics
Related Cards
Card Pools
✕
×
PopCard Settings
Click on the buttons to change the PopCard background.
Elements settings
Click on the button to hide or unhide popcard elements.
Click on the buttons to change the PopCard background.
Click on the button to hide or unhide popcard elements.
And then, in a realistic world, he completed his statement with "until next month".
If Ben actually believes this PR throwaway comment he is either severely deluded, doesn't play the game, or is doing his job to promote the game despite certain flaws they won't admit.
The thing is, new players will never get anything more than basic cards without spending gold or money. It has always been this way. Previously they had to buy some cards from expert and collect from naxx to form a 30-card deck that they want. Now, they also have to build a 30-card deck, only difference is that they have more choices of decks.
new expansions doesn't make cards any harder to obtain, nor does it make it any more difficult for new players to beat veterans. GvG doesn't make things any more difficult for new players, since the power level of cards are maintained after each expansion to ensure game balance.
a catch up system is not needed because it is reasonable for new players to start with only the basic cards and slowly work their way to a desired deck.
there's already a system for new players to "ease in to", it's called casual. We don't need a pseudo-competitive ranking system to determine who is the best newbie.
"Put your face in the light!" - Tirion Fordring
You mean the forum post you gave that, on the first page, flat out says that the meta in Legacy, the 'all cards available' has a slow meta ? Slower than Standard, which is more limited? The thread where people say that they prefer not going to Legacy because the meta changes slower there?
The thread where people are saying that the problem with legacy is that the cards are more expensive (though this is debated so yeah). The thread where, at least the portion that I read, NO ONE said that Legacy suffers from massively quick meta shifts, though they do say that the format allows for multiple ways to be competitive instead of 'the same 4 decks' that standard does?
Remember, we're not talking VARIETY. Having a lot of decks available to be competitive isn't a sign of a fast changing meta. In fact, it MEANS just wait it says: there's a lot of decks that you can choose that are all competitive. As in people aren't making a deck then suddenly seeing it get toppled by a meta shift, which is the crux of the argument against Ben's comment.
The issue is whether players can choose a deck that won't get wiped out due to meta shifts.
And according to YOUR POST, Standard, the more limited format, is more likely to meta shift than Legacy, the broader format.
And assuming HS will retain a 'legacy' style format, more expansions will mean more choices for new players on what deck they can focus on, and a SLOWER meta so that they can stick to that deck for a longer period while they grow their collection.
Widen the meta? We're talking about meta SHIFTS. We're not talking about how many decks are viable. We're talking about whether the deck you chose gets weeded out by counter decks. A Wider meta suggests that there's LESS 'countering' going on as a countered deck will be weeded out of the meta. For example, when Naxx sped up the game with deathrattle decks, slow paladin control decks were countered and, thus, weeded out of tournament play completely. That's a meta shift and it results in a narrower meta since players will avoid decks that counter one another and try to aim for decks with less weaknesses.
Legacy has a wide meta. It also has a slow changing meta, proven by your very reference.
I'm very much willing to change my logic. First, I'll need SOMETHING to prove it wrong. As in other than someone telling me "you're wrong youre wrong your wrong." then giving me a reference full of MTG vets that prove I'm right.
Then PROVIDE IT! I've asked this several times. You prove me with 4 pages of text with the first page proving YOU wrong.
Otherwise, we're done here.
One does not simply walk into Mordor,
unless they want to be the best they can be.
The problem is that as more expansions are released, there's going to be a bigger card pool. They may make a deck consisting of the current 30 cards, but what happens when the meta changes? Or when they have to go to previous adventures like Naxx for specific core cards? You say a catch up system isn't necessary because you're only looking at the present, what about when there have been 4 or 5 expansions?
You're trying to change the argument again. My post was about variety of decks, not about rapid shifts in the meta, you're putting words in my mouth, pretty cheap. The thread quite clearly shows that Legacy has far more variety in terms of decks, that was my point. You are trying to argue that the post proves that high variability does not cause meta shifts the only problem being Legacy is limited.
Let's go step by step:
1) Legacy has more variety in decks due to card amount, you cannot deny this any longer
2) Larger amount of cards directly causes more possible decks
The problem is that you are trying to use Legacy's stability as evidence that card variety does not cause meta changes. The problem here is that you're ignoring that Legacy does not change, the reason standard is more dynamic is because it is constantly changing. The problem with Hearthstone is that it will eventually approach Legacy levels of cards but it won't be capped off.
You are literally trying to blind yourself. Your deductions are atrocious, you ignore the single biggest part of Legacy to make your point, my question is do you believe your deductions? I clearly proved my point that increased card variety directly leads to more possible decks, you couldn't handle that so you stated that I claimed that increased card variety leads to a rapidly changing meta. The problem is that Legacy DOES NOT CHANGE, we are looking at 2 different phenomenon, the reason Standard changes is because of new blocks. Hearthstone has BOTH of these problems. There is at the moment no plan to limit what cards can be played and there is an indefinite possibility of expansions.
All of these are your quotes from further back in the topic. Your last sentence marks 'the question'. How fast will the meta change.
Since you said that, I focused my debate ON that question. How fast does the meta change? Is it too fast? Will it be too fast?
This was never a discussion about variety. Variety wasn't the issue. It was 'how fast the meta shifts."
So to answer your question I'll use you as a reference: Using YOUR quotes, in context mind you:
1. The question isn't that the meta changes, the question is how fast.
2. Legacy does not change, the reason standard is more dynamic is because it is constantly changing
3. Hearthstone...will eventually approach Legacy levels of cards but it won't be capped off.
So using your evidence, which you provided plenty of, if hearthstone keeps going the way it will:
1. The meta will NOT move fast, or as fast as limited formats would end up being.
2. Many different decks, far more than in limited formats, will be available, all of them viable for competition.
Thus new players will have a large number of decks to choose from, all of which will be competitive and viable in HS's future.
And with that, I now feel better about HS's future, and Ben's vision of it. I actually didn't like his mentality, but well I was ignorant of MTG and it's format systems. Now that I know more, thanks to you, I know that we'll have more viable decks with more cards and a slower meta even with new expansions so long as we DON'T create limited formats. By your own words, the question'is 'how fast with the meta change. The answer is, it will slow down.
Beyond that, you seem agitated and angry over this thread. I advise next time you don't try to create threads made purely to boost your ego by winning internet fights. Especially if you focus more on "OMG you did a logical fallacy" and less on actually proving your point. Not giving your opponents more tools to work with and remembering just what you wrote earlier helps too.
Have a good day. Thanks for the post. Try to be less mean to everyone next time.
And no, I won't return to this thread. Feel free to post as you like from here.
One does not simply walk into Mordor,
unless they want to be the best they can be.
I was talking about Hearthstone, not Legacy. Are you that sorry that you have to take posts out of context? You are trying to combine two different quotes, I never said Legacy has a fast changing meta, I said it has more deck variety because of more cards. Your lies are disgusting and unconvincing.
"1. The meta will NOT move fast, or as fast as limited formats would end up being. "
There you go again. You're trying to compare a limited format for a constantly changing one. While completely ignoring the point of the comparison, do you just not get it? I just don't understand how you can convince yourself of what you are saying.
"Thus new players will have a large number of decks to choose from, all of which will be competitive and viable in HS's future. "
There will be a larger number of decks, but the "competitive and viable" part is not warranted. Hearthstone has less opportunity than other card games because of the low amount of cards per deck. It restricts the amount of variation. While there will definitely be more archetypes that have not been seen before, the variation within each specific deck archetype is smaller, being adjusted for specific match ups. The same way we see current decks make small changes but remain mostly the same. The problem is these minute changes, you cannot limit what card a deck is going to need for a specific meta. Your claim that someone can just go back and craft that card also does not consider adventures.
"with more cards and a slower meta even with new expansions so long as we DON'T create limited formats. "
Thanks for proving you have negative reading comprehension. Limited formats MAKE the meta slower, did you not look at Legacy? I just don't fucking get it, are you confused as to what the word limited means?
It's a shame you are the best this thread had to offer, you've shown your true colors as either a compulsive liar or someone that lacks basic reading comprehension.
Oh snap, Kahgro got served.
if I could weaponize the amount of condescension going on in this thread I could blow up the goddamn Moon.