Casual stupid dogs from Blizzard. This nerfs so bad and useless on paper. Where is Lock's quest? How long Sorcerer's Apprentice will be so broken? Why they scared so much to make big changes(or real) changes,
I'd pay good money for a game designed and produced specifically by dogs. To be more specific, Pugs, sign me up!
How does it remain "unchanged" if 2 of its core cards got nerfed? One o the biggest early game plays you could do with this deck was drop a giant turn 4, to rez it the next turn, if they even managed to kill it. Giants wont be playable turn 4 anymore, you also cant windfury a giant that stuck around for 5 anymore as that card also got nerfed.
I do get people feel the need to be vocal about the nerfs, but posting a list that has 2 of the changed cards in it and going like "nothing changed" is... mildy irritating.
Casual stupid dogs from Blizzard. This nerfs so bad and useless on paper. Where is Lock's quest? How long Sorcerer's Apprentice will be so broken? Why they scared so much to make big changes(or real) changes,
I'd pay good money for a game designed and produced specifically by dogs. To be more specific, Pugs, sign me up!
Quest Lock is going to be around even more now. Stealer of Souls and the Quest needed to be dialed back. With Paladin and Hunter getting nerf expect Lock to be everywhere.
Quest Lock is going to be around even more now. Stealer of Souls and the Quest needed to be dialed back. With Paladin and Hunter getting nerf expect Lock to be everywhere.
The stealer of souls version is statistically the worst version. It has a bad WR. I'm not stressing about it.
I don't think we necessarily need a meta where games go past turn 10, except when both players whiff on their combos. But some cool win conditions are basically unplayable before turn 10, like Cthun or Priest Quest. And the non-viability of those saddens me.
So which is it? Why even let players get to 10 mana crystals? Why even print 10-Cost cards?
If they changed maximum mana to 7 crystals, how long before people start saying a 7-turn game is way too long?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Why, you never expected justice from a company, did you? They have neither a soul to lose nor a body to kick." -- Lady Saba Holland
I don't think we necessarily need a meta where games go past turn 10, except when both players whiff on their combos. But some cool win conditions are basically unplayable before turn 10, like Cthun or Priest Quest. And the non-viability of those saddens me.
So which is it? Why even let players get to 10 mana crystals? Why even print 10-Cost cards?
If they changed maximum mana to 7 crystals, how long before people start saying a 7-turn game is way too long?
Quests should be free, not take up a card slot and both players should start with 3 crystals, like battlegrounds. Nobody wants games to last more than four turns.
I don't think we necessarily need a meta where games go past turn 10, except when both players whiff on their combos. But some cool win conditions are basically unplayable before turn 10, like Cthun or Priest Quest. And the non-viability of those saddens me.
So which is it? Why even let players get to 10 mana crystals? Why even print 10-Cost cards?
If they changed maximum mana to 7 crystals, how long before people start saying a 7-turn game is way too long?
Personally, I really like metas that offer every type of deck. I'd like it if we could get back to a little bit of everything.
I don't think we necessarily need a meta where games go past turn 10, except when both players whiff on their combos. But some cool win conditions are basically unplayable before turn 10, like Cthun or Priest Quest. And the non-viability of those saddens me.
So which is it? Why even let players get to 10 mana crystals? Why even print 10-Cost cards?
If they changed maximum mana to 7 crystals, how long before people start saying a 7-turn game is way too long?
Quests should be free, not take up a card slot and both players should start with 3 crystals, like battlegrounds. Nobody wants games to last more than four turns.
Not everyone feels that way. I sure don't. While it would be cool to have quests not take up a hand slot, I'd enjoy the game less if we started with 3 crystals. Constructed Hearthstone isn't battlegrounds for a reason.
Quests should be free, not take up a card slot and both players should start with 3 crystals, like battlegrounds. Nobody wants games to last more than four turns.
Great idea!!!! While we're at it, let's just let the computer build our decks, play our cards, hell even craft new cards for us. Hearthstone idle, here we come!!
For those of us with an attention span longer than 2 minutes, a 4 turn game sounds like torture. A sizable portion of the HS community (myself included) considers battlegrounds to be Hearthstone for Dummies.
Quests should be free, not take up a card slot and both players should start with 3 crystals, like battlegrounds. Nobody wants games to last more than four turns.
Great idea!!!! While we're at it, let's just let the computer build our decks, play our cards, hell even craft new cards for us. Hearthstone idle, here we come!!
For those of us with an attention span longer than 2 minutes, a 4 turn game sounds like torture. A sizable portion of the HS community (myself included) considers battlegrounds to be Hearthstone for Dummies.
While I enjoy Battle Grounds from time to time. I will always prefer Constructed as it is much more fun IMO.
Quests should be free, not take up a card slot and both players should start with 3 crystals, like battlegrounds. Nobody wants games to last more than four turns.
Great idea!!!! While we're at it, let's just let the computer build our decks, play our cards, hell even craft new cards for us. Hearthstone idle, here we come!!
For those of us with an attention span longer than 2 minutes, a 4 turn game sounds like torture. A sizable portion of the HS community (myself included) considers battlegrounds to be Hearthstone for Dummies.
You people are so quick to throw your witty comments at others, is not it quite obvious his remark was sarcastic?
Quests should be free, not take up a card slot and both players should start with 3 crystals, like battlegrounds. Nobody wants games to last more than four turns.
Great idea!!!! While we're at it, let's just let the computer build our decks, play our cards, hell even craft new cards for us. Hearthstone idle, here we come!!
For those of us with an attention span longer than 2 minutes, a 4 turn game sounds like torture. A sizable portion of the HS community (myself included) considers battlegrounds to be Hearthstone for Dummies.
You people are so quick to throw your witty comments at others, is not it quite obvious his remark was sarcastic?
I don't think we necessarily need a meta where games go past turn 10, except when both players whiff on their combos. But some cool win conditions are basically unplayable before turn 10, like Cthun or Priest Quest. And the non-viability of those saddens me.
So which is it? Why even let players get to 10 mana crystals? Why even print 10-Cost cards?
If they changed maximum mana to 7 crystals, how long before people start saying a 7-turn game is way too long?
He said past turn 10 though, not turn 10. And I mean control mirror matchups still go way beyond turn 10 to this day, and many aggro vs control matchups do as well, if the aggro player has guts and is willing to go on knowing he's gonna lose in however many turns when his resources are exhausted. Or even combo matchups that draw poorly or misplay (yes they can, how many times have I been granted a long game and a free win against a quest mage that just could not draw the spell school he needed the entire match..).
But players don't wanna play control anymore because they don't like losing to combo decks and combo decks are viable in this meta so, no turn 10 for them, it's their decision mostly.
This thing about high cost cards being less effective than low cost cards in Hearthstone has existed forever and people don't need to pretend it happened because of UiS powercreep or the direction the meta has taken (i'm not saying that you did it's just a general statement).
In Hearthstone you can do more things with two 3-cost cards than one 6-cost cards and it works with every mana cost, it's kind of an unbreakable rule of thumb and totally independant of individual card design or power level, it's more a natural card game thing.
Now, in my opinion, you can have a good game even if it doesn't get to turn 10, even if you have 10 cost cards in your decks. Between turn 8 and 12 are the best games in my opinion. If it's less than 8 it often feels like at least one of the players couldn't do anything, but it's mostly a matchup matter and the game that you lost on turn 4 would not have felt better should you have lost on turn 10, but sometimes even games that end on turn 4 are very interactive and challenging for both opponents and one misplay away from disaster, and more fun than some control mirror ending on turn 25. Old school 20+ turns fatigue games are just boring to death no matter who's winning for a vast majority of players, and the more time passes the more you allow RNG to get involved in the final result. The more time passes the more you feel like you're wasting your time. (maybe it's just me but I feel more accomplished when I do 5 short games of Hearthstone in a day, than 1 long game, it's also more opportunity for me to win with non-optimal decks, losing in 5 minutes and trying again certainly feels better than losing in 45 min and being out of time for your next game)
Anyway, I feel like it's easy to understand why Blizzard don't want many games to go beyond turn 10, but also why they keep printing greedy or fun or interesting high cost cards for people that enjoy them and don't care about ranks as much as we do. And from time to time there are generally high cost cards and high curve decks that pop out in the meta.
Maybe playing druid should be a also be a rule for people that want 10 mana plays nowadays. If you can't get more turns, get more mana. Overgrowth is still an absurd card that can totally abuse higher curves than usual, even if it can make you lose the game against aggro. If you're playing hunter then you're just gonna have to accept it's going to be a lot harder to play and benefit from Emeriss than your typical druid.
I obviously don't speak for anyone but myself, but if the meta no longer allows control decks to be viable, then I think I'm done with the game and I think the game will be less good overall as a result.
A game like Hearthstone fundamentally needs the classic archetypes for the decks to be balanced. A lack of control and the success of quest decks (I don't really consider them combo in the traditional sense) focres the meta towards extreme aggro. It then becomes entirely about who draws the best mulligan and who picked the right class before they started. There's so little opportunity for skill to play a part it becomes a coinflip, not a game.
I'd pay good money for a game designed and produced specifically by dogs. To be more specific, Pugs, sign me up!
How does it remain "unchanged" if 2 of its core cards got nerfed? One o the biggest early game plays you could do with this deck was drop a giant turn 4, to rez it the next turn, if they even managed to kill it. Giants wont be playable turn 4 anymore, you also cant windfury a giant that stuck around for 5 anymore as that card also got nerfed.
I do get people feel the need to be vocal about the nerfs, but posting a list that has 2 of the changed cards in it and going like "nothing changed" is... mildy irritating.
I 100% agree. I'd be beyond down for this.
Quest Lock is going to be around even more now. Stealer of Souls and the Quest needed to be dialed back. With Paladin and Hunter getting nerf expect Lock to be everywhere.
The stealer of souls version is statistically the worst version. It has a bad WR. I'm not stressing about it.
So which is it? Why even let players get to 10 mana crystals? Why even print 10-Cost cards?
If they changed maximum mana to 7 crystals, how long before people start saying a 7-turn game is way too long?
"Why, you never expected justice from a company, did you? They have neither a soul to lose nor a body to kick." -- Lady Saba Holland
Quests should be free, not take up a card slot and both players should start with 3 crystals, like battlegrounds. Nobody wants games to last more than four turns.
Personally, I really like metas that offer every type of deck. I'd like it if we could get back to a little bit of everything.
Not everyone feels that way. I sure don't. While it would be cool to have quests not take up a hand slot, I'd enjoy the game less if we started with 3 crystals. Constructed Hearthstone isn't battlegrounds for a reason.
Great idea!!!! While we're at it, let's just let the computer build our decks, play our cards, hell even craft new cards for us. Hearthstone idle, here we come!!
For those of us with an attention span longer than 2 minutes, a 4 turn game sounds like torture. A sizable portion of the HS community (myself included) considers battlegrounds to be Hearthstone for Dummies.
While I enjoy Battle Grounds from time to time. I will always prefer Constructed as it is much more fun IMO.
You people are so quick to throw your witty comments at others, is not it quite obvious his remark was sarcastic?
Sarcasm doesn't travel well with no intonation.
As was mine.
I'm now moving to Battlegrounds or offline
ok thanks for coming don’t let the door hit you were the good lord split ya.
He said past turn 10 though, not turn 10. And I mean control mirror matchups still go way beyond turn 10 to this day, and many aggro vs control matchups do as well, if the aggro player has guts and is willing to go on knowing he's gonna lose in however many turns when his resources are exhausted. Or even combo matchups that draw poorly or misplay (yes they can, how many times have I been granted a long game and a free win against a quest mage that just could not draw the spell school he needed the entire match..).
But players don't wanna play control anymore because they don't like losing to combo decks and combo decks are viable in this meta so, no turn 10 for them, it's their decision mostly.
This thing about high cost cards being less effective than low cost cards in Hearthstone has existed forever and people don't need to pretend it happened because of UiS powercreep or the direction the meta has taken (i'm not saying that you did it's just a general statement).
In Hearthstone you can do more things with two 3-cost cards than one 6-cost cards and it works with every mana cost, it's kind of an unbreakable rule of thumb and totally independant of individual card design or power level, it's more a natural card game thing.
Now, in my opinion, you can have a good game even if it doesn't get to turn 10, even if you have 10 cost cards in your decks. Between turn 8 and 12 are the best games in my opinion. If it's less than 8 it often feels like at least one of the players couldn't do anything, but it's mostly a matchup matter and the game that you lost on turn 4 would not have felt better should you have lost on turn 10, but sometimes even games that end on turn 4 are very interactive and challenging for both opponents and one misplay away from disaster, and more fun than some control mirror ending on turn 25. Old school 20+ turns fatigue games are just boring to death no matter who's winning for a vast majority of players, and the more time passes the more you allow RNG to get involved in the final result. The more time passes the more you feel like you're wasting your time. (maybe it's just me but I feel more accomplished when I do 5 short games of Hearthstone in a day, than 1 long game, it's also more opportunity for me to win with non-optimal decks, losing in 5 minutes and trying again certainly feels better than losing in 45 min and being out of time for your next game)
Anyway, I feel like it's easy to understand why Blizzard don't want many games to go beyond turn 10, but also why they keep printing greedy or fun or interesting high cost cards for people that enjoy them and don't care about ranks as much as we do. And from time to time there are generally high cost cards and high curve decks that pop out in the meta.
Maybe playing druid should be a also be a rule for people that want 10 mana plays nowadays. If you can't get more turns, get more mana. Overgrowth is still an absurd card that can totally abuse higher curves than usual, even if it can make you lose the game against aggro. If you're playing hunter then you're just gonna have to accept it's going to be a lot harder to play and benefit from Emeriss than your typical druid.
I obviously don't speak for anyone but myself, but if the meta no longer allows control decks to be viable, then I think I'm done with the game and I think the game will be less good overall as a result.
A game like Hearthstone fundamentally needs the classic archetypes for the decks to be balanced. A lack of control and the success of quest decks (I don't really consider them combo in the traditional sense) focres the meta towards extreme aggro. It then becomes entirely about who draws the best mulligan and who picked the right class before they started. There's so little opportunity for skill to play a part it becomes a coinflip, not a game.
Not touching warlock quest is a joke, they can still easily finish quest turn 4
Hey everyone!
Patch is live and I miraculously haven't faced a single quest warlock, quest mage, hunter or paladin in my one game played so far.
Nerfs were a success! Woohoo! Praise Yogg!
"Easily?" I bet even in Wild that's not a common occurrence.