It's fine to make the game go faster and not promote control games that last longer than 10 mins, but at least allow both players to interact and not let solitaire happen. These archetypes are examples of unfun (uninteractive) decks that they should beware and get rid of:
- Mage: Freeze, all of their Quests (past and current), and other OTK Como decks
- DemonHunter / Druid: OTK Combo decks
- Priest: Big Priest
- Rogue: Miracle
- Warlock: Questline, Darkglare, and any card that relates to using health for mana costs
- Paladin / Shaman / Hunter / Warrior: none, but their cards have overpower issues
Somehow i appreciate the current state of the game, since its one step closer to finally deleting and forgetting this game. But since i wasted a lot of time to collect all my cards, its a natural instinct to not randomly delete everything.
Somehow i appreciate the current state of the game, since its one step closer to finally deleting and forgetting this game. But since i wasted a lot of time to collect all my cards, its a natural instinct to not randomly delete everything.
If they manage to fuck these nerfs up (which I'm almost certain they will), it might be time for another long break for me. This meta has settled into one of the least fun in the games history. Whether the devs personally like control or not, they need to understand that in order to appeal to a large audience, they need to have something to offer everyone.
I feel like I'm on the outside looking in at the moment & I refuse to let the front page of hsreplay, dictate what I play or don't play, like the majority of players always do.
Looks like I'll just have to speak with my wallet & hop on over to MTG, where I'm not pigeonholed into playing what the devs deem acceptable.
How can you whine about long mirror matches? I mean YOU chose to play that deck. In this case you BOTH chose to play that deck.
I know a big reason I play control is for the long, thought out games.
Control vs aggro tends to be fairly quick (regardless of what the aggro players may say). They either burn through all of their resources and you survive, or they manage to catch you with your pants down and you die.
Control vs midrange tend to be the most fun imo. You have to walk that thin line of not over-committing to clear the board and not letting them walk all over you. Very intense gameplay.
Control vs control can also be fun for similar reasons. But when it's a mirror match, you both have the same options and you both have the same answers so it REALLY just comes down to who's luckier.
Iksar made it very clear on Twitter that just outvaluing your opponent wont be a viable wincon going forward, meaning that pure control is now a thing of the past.
They wanna give control proactive wincons, so they will practically become combo decks with control tools, which is not the same.
This is not something any nerfs will change, as it is part of their new design filosophy. They will aim to make these new combo decks slower and less efficient with the nerfs, but thats about it. HS is in the middle of a huge transition rn.
How will the end of pure control affect the game? Was hoping to see opinions about it.
I think it's actually fairly impressive that they have been able to keep control as active as they have over the years despite the frustration from the control community.
Hearthstone just isn't designed to support control without fundamentally changing the game in to something else.
I feel like they created quests with good intentions towards the control side but just missed the mark when it came to what control players wanted but, as a control player, I wonder if it is even possible to balance control given the nature of hearthstone and its mechanics.
I dunno, there is some control Priest decks starting to rise up. It always takes a few weeks for meta to settle down before Control sees play. of course insta concede vs Lock and Mage but you auto win vs OtK Decks with Illucia and destroy Paladin.
I remember back in the days of Dr Boom Control Warrior, it was really annoying for me to play against them, as it is now playing vs mage.
I think the better direction for preventing long and painful games vs Priest/Warrior back in the days, would be to limit endless discovery effects rather than just crushing the archetype with great combo tools.
That being said, I still prefer those control decks over mage for one simple reason: when I play minions vs control, they may or may not get removed, but I decide how much I want to invest and do I want to risk it. It still takes some decision making.
Against mage, unless I play a stealth minion or Robes of protection, I know I can't play minions cause not only they will get removed, but also help my opponent to develop their game. And that's bs. I've never seen a situation, when you get punished so hard for playing minions, which by the way, is still one of the key aspect to the game.
That's why I think other classes are ok, maybe need little nerfs here and there, but I wouldn't mind if Blizzard killed the entire archetype that is no minion quest mage. And I say it as a player who has played Mage the most out of all classes, but this expansion it's unplayable for me
This is prolly a result of all the people whining on here about created cards and priest card generation. Thanks!
It's unfair to blame ALL of it on that. As others have mentioned, the Control Warrior with Dr. Boom that lead to 1 hour or more mirror matches was just as bad.
I think this is an attempt to reign in those kinds of excesses. The Control Warrior and Control Priest matches that went on forever cause their game plan was just to drain you of any possiblities to still win, instead of having an actual game plan to win themselves.
Time spent playing a game shouldn't be a measuring stick for how good it was.
You can have an interesting game AND be done in 10 min. They are not mutually exclusive.
I actually agree with you. For some bizarre reason I actually enjoy this meta lol. I do like the shorter games, but I did always enjoy fatigue matches as well. One of my favorite decks ever was old mill druid. Pre jade idol. When it actually took skill and you didn't "mill" your opponent by milling yourself and swapping decks. The worst metas imo have actually been control metas like Kobolds and Catacombs and the entire year of the raven. When every game was "play 3 minions in the first 8 turns, then summon 40 mana worth of taunts on turn 10" (witching hour taunt druid, big priest, cube-warlock) or combo deck that wins by default if you don't get killed by turn 15. Ultra greedy decks that can't be punished by mid-range decks are the worst thing that ever existed in this game. Luckily that's a thing of the past now lol
There is something fundamentally wrong with questlines being completed faster than quests. Surely the germ of the idea was the opposite. I don't know what the best solution is. Obviously questlines need to be slowed down but that's just one aspect of a larger problem. Power creep has run amuck. And the situation is much worse in Wild than it is in Standard. Oh sure, Wild is meant to be wilder. But the questlines are thriving and completing even faster there. Whimper.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Dependable loan sharks since 1960. We sink our teeth into every deal we make.
There is something fundamentally wrong with questlines being completed faster than quests. Surely the germ of the idea was the opposite. I don't know what the best solution is. Obviously questlines need to be slowed down but that's just one aspect of a larger problem. Power creep has run amuck. And the situation is much worse in Wild than it is in Standard. Oh sure, Wild is meant to be wilder. But the questlines are thriving and completing even faster there. Whimper.
yeah darkglare warlock can complete quest on t3 with flesh giants. has to wait to play reward one more turn. thats just stupid.
This is actually a fine change if you ask me. Finally, it will be a game it has meant to be and quite honestly, has been for a very long time now.
The level of randomness that one would witness in long control games is unbearable, to say the least. Once in a while, you would actually face a worthy opponent but even then you can't really say that luck wasn't the largest factor in those matchups either.
The number of mistakes this game allows despite being the winner of a game just shows you can't take this game seriously in terms of real esport skill-based game.
Maybe now that you have a clear vision of the game from developers, people will stop fooling themselves they're playing some brain testing simulator and accept they've been playing slot machines for way too long now. It's time to move on guys. Trust me there are better games to enjoy. Just stick with HS for toilet sessions.
Pretty sure he didnt want control to be dead. Hé only stated that the decks that has no wincon and only want to control the board till fatigue shouldnt be promoted.
So hé wants control be able to control the early and mid game so the decks can outvalue with their high costed win conditions.
Good example is rattlegore. If a control warrior can safely play the card he probaly outvalued the aggro/ midrange player anyway so there is no point to try to outvalue the opponent into fatigue.
Another example is lord jaraxus and the priest quest.
So in short, they dont want control to be dead. Only the fatigue type of decks.
Pretty sure he didnt want control to be dead. Hé only stated that the decks that has no wincon and only want to control the board till fatigue shouldnt be promoted.
So hé wants control be able to control the early and mid game so the decks can outvalue with their high costed win conditions.
Good example is rattlegore. If a control warrior can safely play the card he probaly outvalued the aggro/ midrange player anyway so there is no point to try to outvalue the opponent into fatigue.
Another example is lord jaraxus and the priest quest.
So in short, they dont want control to be dead. Only the fatigue type of decks.
...which is exactly what I said. "PURE control is dead", not control as a whole, value/fatigue will cease to be a primary wincon but controllish combo decks will still exist. Not sure how I could have made my point clearer.
Jaraxxus is a bad example though, as it shines in long grindy drawn out games, exactly the kind of gameplay they want to exterminate.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
It's fine to make the game go faster and not promote control games that last longer than 10 mins, but at least allow both players to interact and not let solitaire happen. These archetypes are examples of unfun (uninteractive) decks that they should beware and get rid of:
- Mage: Freeze, all of their Quests (past and current), and other OTK Como decks
- DemonHunter / Druid: OTK Combo decks
- Priest: Big Priest
- Rogue: Miracle
- Warlock: Questline, Darkglare, and any card that relates to using health for mana costs
- Paladin / Shaman / Hunter / Warrior: none, but their cards have overpower issues
Yeah they completly destroyed the game. Kudos for them.
Sneakpeak of new hearthstone beta
https://www.random.org/dice/?num=2
How can you whine about long mirror matches? I mean YOU chose to play that deck. In this case you BOTH chose to play that deck.
Somehow i appreciate the current state of the game, since its one step closer to finally deleting and forgetting this game. But since i wasted a lot of time to collect all my cards, its a natural instinct to not randomly delete everything.
so true bro, so true.
Team 5 just want FACE HUNTER GO BRRRRRR
If they manage to fuck these nerfs up (which I'm almost certain they will), it might be time for another long break for me. This meta has settled into one of the least fun in the games history. Whether the devs personally like control or not, they need to understand that in order to appeal to a large audience, they need to have something to offer everyone.
I feel like I'm on the outside looking in at the moment & I refuse to let the front page of hsreplay, dictate what I play or don't play, like the majority of players always do.
Looks like I'll just have to speak with my wallet & hop on over to MTG, where I'm not pigeonholed into playing what the devs deem acceptable.
I know a big reason I play control is for the long, thought out games.
Control vs aggro tends to be fairly quick (regardless of what the aggro players may say). They either burn through all of their resources and you survive, or they manage to catch you with your pants down and you die.
Control vs midrange tend to be the most fun imo. You have to walk that thin line of not over-committing to clear the board and not letting them walk all over you. Very intense gameplay.
Control vs control can also be fun for similar reasons.
But when it's a mirror match, you both have the same options and you both have the same answers so it REALLY just comes down to who's luckier.
Learn to spell the word "philosophy" correctly and your argument will have more merit.
I think it's actually fairly impressive that they have been able to keep control as active as they have over the years despite the frustration from the control community.
Hearthstone just isn't designed to support control without fundamentally changing the game in to something else.
I feel like they created quests with good intentions towards the control side but just missed the mark when it came to what control players wanted but, as a control player, I wonder if it is even possible to balance control given the nature of hearthstone and its mechanics.
I dunno, there is some control Priest decks starting to rise up. It always takes a few weeks for meta to settle down before Control sees play. of course insta concede vs Lock and Mage but you auto win vs OtK Decks with Illucia and destroy Paladin.
I remember back in the days of Dr Boom Control Warrior, it was really annoying for me to play against them, as it is now playing vs mage.
I think the better direction for preventing long and painful games vs Priest/Warrior back in the days, would be to limit endless discovery effects rather than just crushing the archetype with great combo tools.
That being said, I still prefer those control decks over mage for one simple reason: when I play minions vs control, they may or may not get removed, but I decide how much I want to invest and do I want to risk it. It still takes some decision making.
Against mage, unless I play a stealth minion or Robes of protection, I know I can't play minions cause not only they will get removed, but also help my opponent to develop their game. And that's bs. I've never seen a situation, when you get punished so hard for playing minions, which by the way, is still one of the key aspect to the game.
That's why I think other classes are ok, maybe need little nerfs here and there, but I wouldn't mind if Blizzard killed the entire archetype that is no minion quest mage. And I say it as a player who has played Mage the most out of all classes, but this expansion it's unplayable for me
I'm not Paul George, I'm just a fan.
I actually agree with you. For some bizarre reason I actually enjoy this meta lol. I do like the shorter games, but I did always enjoy fatigue matches as well. One of my favorite decks ever was old mill druid. Pre jade idol. When it actually took skill and you didn't "mill" your opponent by milling yourself and swapping decks. The worst metas imo have actually been control metas like Kobolds and Catacombs and the entire year of the raven. When every game was "play 3 minions in the first 8 turns, then summon 40 mana worth of taunts on turn 10" (witching hour taunt druid, big priest, cube-warlock) or combo deck that wins by default if you don't get killed by turn 15. Ultra greedy decks that can't be punished by mid-range decks are the worst thing that ever existed in this game. Luckily that's a thing of the past now lol
Hearthstone in general is dead and buried.
There is something fundamentally wrong with questlines being completed faster than quests. Surely the germ of the idea was the opposite. I don't know what the best solution is. Obviously questlines need to be slowed down but that's just one aspect of a larger problem. Power creep has run amuck. And the situation is much worse in Wild than it is in Standard. Oh sure, Wild is meant to be wilder. But the questlines are thriving and completing even faster there. Whimper.
Dependable loan sharks since 1960. We sink our teeth into every deal we make.
yeah darkglare warlock can complete quest on t3 with flesh giants. has to wait to play reward one more turn. thats just stupid.
This is actually a fine change if you ask me. Finally, it will be a game it has meant to be and quite honestly, has been for a very long time now.
The level of randomness that one would witness in long control games is unbearable, to say the least. Once in a while, you would actually face a worthy opponent but even then you can't really say that luck wasn't the largest factor in those matchups either.
The number of mistakes this game allows despite being the winner of a game just shows you can't take this game seriously in terms of real esport skill-based game.
Maybe now that you have a clear vision of the game from developers, people will stop fooling themselves they're playing some brain testing simulator and accept they've been playing slot machines for way too long now. It's time to move on guys. Trust me there are better games to enjoy. Just stick with HS for toilet sessions.
Pretty sure he didnt want control to be dead. Hé only stated that the decks that has no wincon and only want to control the board till fatigue shouldnt be promoted.
So hé wants control be able to control the early and mid game so the decks can outvalue with their high costed win conditions.
Good example is rattlegore. If a control warrior can safely play the card he probaly outvalued the aggro/ midrange player anyway so there is no point to try to outvalue the opponent into fatigue.
Another example is lord jaraxus and the priest quest.
So in short, they dont want control to be dead. Only the fatigue type of decks.
...which is exactly what I said. "PURE control is dead", not control as a whole, value/fatigue will cease to be a primary wincon but controllish combo decks will still exist. Not sure how I could have made my point clearer.
Jaraxxus is a bad example though, as it shines in long grindy drawn out games, exactly the kind of gameplay they want to exterminate.